ML20195E787
| ML20195E787 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Three Mile Island  |
| Issue date: | 11/05/1998 |
| From: | CENTER FOR NUCLEAR WASTE REGULATORY ANALYSES |
| To: | NRC |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20195E784 | List: |
| References | |
| CON-FIN-D-1035, CON-FIN-J-5164, CON-FIN-J-5186, CON-FIN-J-5206, CON-FIN-J-5210, CON-FIN-J-5226, CON-NRC-02-97-009, CON-NRC-2-97-9, REF-WM-11 HLWR, PMPR-99-1, NUDOCS 9811190117 | |
| Download: ML20195E787 (38) | |
Text
._ ___ .-._ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ . _
l* .
d 1
1 i CNWRA PROGRAM MANAGER'S PERIODIC REPORT
! ON ACTIVITIES OF THE CENTER FOR NUCLEAR WASTE REGULATORY ANALYSES i
i l
For the Fiscal Reporting Period a
September 26 - October 23,1998 PMPR No. 99-1 November 5,1998 9et119,04*179ettosr
% ew;
)
I j
l TABLE OF CONTENTS I
! Section Page l
l TABLES.........................................................................iv i . A B B REVI ATI ON S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v I l' EXECUTIVE S UMMA RY-PERIOD 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xi 1
TE C HNI CA L . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I 1.1 CNWRA Operations (COPS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 ;
1.2 Igneous Activity (I A) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 l 1.3 Structural Deformation and Seismicity (SDS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.4 Evolution of the Near-Field Environment (ENFE) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 L 1.5 Container Life and Source Term (CLST) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 1.6 Thermal Effects on Flow (TEF) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 1.7 Repository Design and Thermal-Mechanical Effects (RDTME) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 1.8 Total System Performance Assessment and Integration (TSPAl) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 1.9 Activities Related to Development of the NRC High-Level Waste Regulations (ARDR) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 1.10 Unsaturated and Saturated Flow Under Isothermal Conditions (USFIC) . . . . . . . . . . . 9 1.11 Radionuclide Transport (RT) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 1.12 Tank Waste Remediation Systems (TWRS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 1.13 Three Mile Island Unit 2 Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (TMI-2 IS FSI) '. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 1.14 Dry Transfer System (DTS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 1.15 Centralized Interim Storage Facility (CISF) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 1.16 Private Fuel Storage Facility (PFSF) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 1.17 Savannah River Site Aluminum-Based Spent Fuel (SRSASF) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 2 M ANAG EM ENT I S S UES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 3 MAJOR PROBLEMS .......... ......................... .................. 13 4
SUMMARY
OF SCHEDULE CHANGES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 5
SUMMARY
OF FINANCI AL STATUS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 APPENDIX-Planned and Actual Costs, and Cost Variances Period 1-FY1999 l Ii$
TABLES .
Table Page l' CNWRA Core Staff-Current Profile and Hiring Plan * (Period 1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 2 Summary of Schedule Changes (Period 1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 3 Deliverables (Period 1 ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
'4 Financial Status (Period 1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 5 Private Fuel Storage Facility License Fee Cost Recovery Status (Period 1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 I
r iV
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~
l ABBREVIATIONS ID One-Dimensional CDROM Compact Disk Read Only Memory 2D Two-Dimensional CDS Compliance Determination Strategy 3D Three-Dimensional CDTS Commission Decision Tracking System AA Atomic Absorption CEB Center for Environmental Biotechnology '
AAI Average AnnualInfiltration CEC Commission of the European ACD Advanced Conceptual Design Communities ACF Alumina (in excess of alkali feldspar), CFD Computational Fluid Dynamics Calcium Oxide, Ferromagnesian Oxide CFR Code of Federal Regulation ACNW Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste CIAC Computer Incident Advisory Capability ACRS Advanced Computer Review System CISF Centralized Interim Storage Facility ADAMS Agencywide Documents Access and CLST Container Life and Source Term Management System CM Configuration Management AECL Atomic Energy of Canada Limited CNWRA Center for Nuclear Waste Regulatory AES Atomic Emission Spectrometry Analyses AGU American Geophysical Union CNWRA OPS Operations Plan for the Repository Al Administrative Item Program ALTS Apache Leap Test Site COI Conflict ofInterest AML Areal Mass Loading COPS CNWRA Operations ANS American Nuclear Society CPP Cyclic Potentiodynamic Polarization ANSI American National Standards Institute CQAM CNWRA Quality Assurance Manual AO Annotated Outline CRG Center Review Group AP Administrative Procedure CRM Corrosion Allowance Material APB Acid-Producing Bacteria CRWMS Civilian Radioactive Waste AR Assessment Report Management System ARDR Activities Related to Development of CSCS Constrained Stochastic Climate the NRC liigh-Level Waste Regulations Simulator ASCE American Society of Civil Engineers CSH Calcium Silicate flydrate ASCll American Standard Code for CSPE Corrosion Science and Process Information Interchange Engineering ASLB Atomic Safety and Licensing Board DAS Data Acquisition System ASME American Society of Mechanical DBE Design Basis Event Engineers DC Division of Contracts ASTM American Society for Testing and DCAA Defense Contract Audit Agency Materials DCB Double Cantilever Beam ASU Arizona State University DCF Dose Conversion Factor ATDTS Automated Technical Data Tracking DCM Dual Continuum Model estem D&D Decommissioning and Decontamination BEG Jureau of Economic Geology DECOVALEX Development of Coupled Models and BFD Basis for Design Their Validation Against Experiments BM Bare Mountain in Nuclear Waste Isolation BMF Bare Mountain Fault DEIS Drafi Environmental Impact Statement BNFL British Nuclear Fuels Limited DEM Digital Elevation Model BTP Branch Technical Position DF Dilution Factor CAI Color Alteration index DFCSS Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and CAM Corrosion Resist Material Safeguards CAR Corrective Action Request DIE Determination ofImportance CCDF Complementary Cumulative Evaluation Distribution Functiori DIMNS Division ofIndustrial and Medical CCL Commitment Control Log Nuclear Safety CCM Constant Capacitance Model DKM Dual Permeability Model CD-R CDROM Recordable DLG Digital Line Graph CDF Cumulative Distribution Function DLM Diffuse Layer Model CDM Compliance Determination Method DNAG Decade of North American Geology CDOCS Consolidated document Management DNFSB Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board System DOE U.S. Department of Energy V
ABBREVIATIONS (cont'd) .
DOE DP DOE Defense Program GERT General Employee Radiological DOE-RU U.S. Department of Energy Regulatory Training Unit GET General Employee Training DRA Division of Regulatory Applications GFM Geological Framework Model DST Drift Scale Test GliGC Geollydrology and geochemistry DTED Digital Terrain Elevation Data GIA Generalized Importance Analysis DTS Dry Transfer System GIS Geographic Information System DWM Division of Waste Management GLGP Geology and Geophysics EBS Engineered Barrier System GPS Global Positioning Satellite EBSER Engineered Barrier System GROA Geologic Repository Operations Area Experimental Research GS Geologic Setting EBSPAC Engineered Barrier System GSA Geologic Society of America Performance Assessment Code GTFE Great Tolbachik Fissure Eruption ECM Equivalent Continuum Model GUI Graphics User Interface EDO Office of the Executive Director for GWSI Groundwater System Integration Operations GWTT Groundwater Travel Time EDX Energy-Dispersive X-Ray Spectroscopy IILUR liigh-Level Waste and Uranium EIS Environmental Impact Statement Recovery Projects Branch EM Element Manager IILW liigh-Level Waste EMPA Electron MicroProbe Analysis IIRTEM liigh-Resolution Transmission Electron ENE East-Northeast Microscopy ENFE Evolution of the Near-Field IA Igneous Activity Environment IBM International Business Machines ENGB Engineering and Geosciences Branch ICP Inductively Coupled Plasma EnPA Energy Policy Act of 1992 ICPP Idaho Chemical Processing Plant ENS European Nuclear Society IDLII immediately Dangerous to Life and EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency llealth EPR Electrochemical Potentiokinetic IIILRWMC International liigh-Level Radioactive Reactivation Waste Management Conference and EPRI Electric Power Research Institute Exposition EQA Extemal Quality Assurance IM Intermediate Milestone EROS Earth Resource Observation System IME Industrial Mobilization Exemption ESF Exploratory Studies Facility IMS Information Management Systems ESP Environmental Simulation Program INEEL Idaho National Engineering and EW East-West Environmental Laboratory
, EXAFS Extended X Ray Absorption Fine INETER instituto Nicaraguense de Estudios l
Structure TERritoriales i FAC Favorable Condition INTRAVAL International Code Validation l FCRG Format and Content Regulatory Guide I/O Input / Output
! FDSilA Fault Displacement and Seismic liazard IPA Iterative Performance Assessment Analysis IR&D Internal Research & Development l
FEllM Finite Element liest and Mass Transfer IRIS Interim Records information System FEM Finite Element Method IRM Office ofInformation Resources FEP Features, Events, and Processes Management FFRDC Federally Funded Research and IRSR issue Resolution Status Report Development Center ISA Initial Safety Analysis FFF Fast Fourier Transform ISFSI Independent Spent Fuel Storage 1:TE Full-Time Equivalent Installation FTP File Transfer Protocol ISM Integrated Site Model i FY Fiscal Year IVM Interactive Volume Modeling l FYTD Fiscal Year-to-Date IWPE Integrated Waste Package Experiments l GDF Ghost Dance Fault JC Job Code l GEM General Electrochemical Migration JPL Jet Propulsion Laboratory GEOTRAP Geologic Transport of Radionuclides JRC Joint Roughness Coefficient Predictions KTl Key Technical Issue VI
ABBREVIATIONS (cont'd)
KTU Key Technical Uncertainty NSRRC Nuclear Safety Research Review LA License Application Committee LAAO License Application Annotated Outline NTS Nevada Test Site LAN Local Area Network NUREG NRC Technical Report Designation LANL Los Alamos National Laboratory NWPA Nuclear Waste Policy Act, as amended LARP License Application Review Plan NWTRB Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board LAW Low-Activity Waste OBES Office of Basic Energy Sciences LBNL Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory OCRWM Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste l LBT Large Block Test Management l LilS Latin flypercube Sampling OGC Omcc ofGeneral Counsel l LITC Lockheed Information Technology OITS Open-Item Tracking System Company OMB Omce of Management and Budget
{
I LLNL Lawrence L'vermore Nationat ORR Operations Readiness Review l Laboratory ORS Overall Review Strategy l LLW Low-Level Waste OWFN One White Flint North LMAES Lockheed Martin Advanced PA Performance Assessment Environmental Systems PAAG Performance Assessment Advisory LSS Licensing Support System Group LSSPP Licensing Support System Pilot Project PAC Potentially Adverse Condition LSSTB Licensing Support System Test Bed PAllT Performance Assessment and LWR Light Water Reactor Hydrologic Transport Ma Million Years Ago PASP Performance Assessment Strategic Plan MAI Mean AnnualInfiltration PC Personal Computer MC Monte Carlo PC/fCP Personal Computer / Transmission METRA Mass and Energy Transport Control Protocol i MGDS Mined Geologic Disposal System PDF Probability Distribution Function l MH Mechanical-Hydrological PDR Public Document Room MIC Microbially influenced Corrosion PEL Permissible Exposure Limit MINC Multiple Interacting Continua PEM Program Element Manager MIT Massachusetts Institute of Technology PER Prelicensing Evaluation Report MM Major Milestone PFD Probabilistic Fault Displacement MO Management and Operations PFDHA Probabilistic Fault Displacement t MOU Memorandum of Understanding Hazard l MPC Multi-Purpose Canister PFS Private Fuel Storage MRS Monitored Retrievable Storage PFSF Private Fuel Storage Facility MSS MultiSpectral Scanner Pila Preliminary llazard Analysis MTU Metric Ton of Uranium Pl Principal Investigator NAS National Academy of Sciences PMDA Program Management, Policy NAWG Natural Analogue Working Group Development and Analysis StafT NCR Nonconformance Report PMP" Program Manager's Periodic Report NEA Nuclear Energy Agency PMT Photo-Multiplier Tube NEl Nuclear Energy Institute PLL Pacific Northwest National Laboratory NFS Network File Server PO Project Omccr NIOSH National Institutes of Safety and llealth PPA Proposed Program Approach NIR Near-Infrared PPE Prepassivated Platinum Electrode NIST NationalInstitute of Standards and PRA Probabilistic Risk Assessment l Technology PRT Peer Review Team l NMSS Omce of Nuclear Material Safety and PSAG Probabilistic System Assessment Group l Safeguards PSHA Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analyses l NNE North-Northeast PTFE Polytetrafluoroethylene NNW North-Northwest PTn Paintbrush Nonwelded Tuft NOAA National Oceanographic and PVHA Probabilistic Volcanic Hazards Atmospheric Administration Assessment NRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission PVHVIEW Probability of Volcanic Hazards NS North-South VIEW Vil l
l
ABBREVIATIONS (cont'd) ,
PVM Parallel Virtual Machine SKI Swedish Nuclear Power Inspectorate PWR Pressurized Water Reactor S-L Short Transverse-Longitudinal QA Quality Assurance SLAR Side Looking Airborne Radar QAP Quality Assurance Procedure SNF Spent Nuclear Fuel QRAM Quality Requirements Application SNL Sandia National Laboratories Matrix SOTEC Source Term Code RAI Request for AdditionalInformation SOW Statement of Work RASA Regional Aquifer System SPCR Software Problem Correction Report Analysis SRA Systematic Regulatory Analysis RDCO Repository Design, Construction, SRB Sulfate-Reducing Bacteria and Operations SRBS Shafts, Ramps, Borcholes, and their RDTME Repository Design and Thermal- Seals Mechanical Effects SRD Software Requirements Description l REE Rare Earth Element SRS Savannah River Site REECO Reynolds Electrical and Engineering SRSASF Savannah River Site Aluminum-Company, Inc. Based Spent Fuel RES Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research SS Stainless Steel RFP Request for Proposal STEM Scanning Transmission Electron RH Relative Humidity Microscopy l RIP Repository Integration Program STP Staff Technical Position l ROC Repository Operations Criteria SUFLAT Stochastic Analyses of Unsaturated I
RPD Regulatory Program Database Flow And Transport RRT Regulatory Requirement Topic SVF Springerville Volcanic Field RSRG Real Space Renormalization SwRI Southwest Research Institute Group SZ Saturated Zone l RT Radionuclide Transport TA Technical Assistance l RTS Radwaste Treatment System TBD To Be Determined SAP Standards Approval Package TBM Tunnel Boring Machine l
SAR Safety Analysis Report TCP/IP Transmission Control l
[ SCA Site Characterization Analysis Protocol /Internet Protocol l SCC Substantially Complete TDEM Time-Domain Electro-Magnetic l Containment TDI Technical Document Index SCCEX Substantially Complete TDOCS Technical Document Reference Containment Example Database System SCE Standard Calomel Electrode TEF Thermal Effects on Flow SCFF Southern Crater Flat Fault TEM Transmission Electron Microscopy SCM Surface Complexation Models THC Thermal-llydrologic-Chemical SCP Site Characterization Plan THMC Thermal-Hydrologic.
SDMP Site Decommissioning Mechanical-Chemical Management Plan T-L Transverse-Longitudinal SDS Structural Deformation and TLM Triple-Layer Model Seismicity TM Thermal-Mechanical SECY Secretary of the Commission, Office of TMH Thermal-Mechanical-Hydrologic the (NRC) TMI-2 Three Mile Island Unit 2 SELM Spectral Element Method TMS The Minerals, Metals, and Materials SEM Scanning Electron Microscopy Society SER Safety Evaluation Report TOP Technical Operating Procedure SFPO Spent Fuel Project Office TP Technical Position SFVF San Francisco Volcanic Field TPA Total-system Performance Assessment SGI Silicon Graphics Inc. TPI Time Period of Regulatory SGML Standard Generalized Markup Interest Language TR2 DOE Seismic Topical Report No. 2 CHE Standard Hydrogen Electrode TRG Technical Review Group SHT Single Heater Test TSAR Topical Safety Analysis Report SIP Scientific Investigation Plan Vili
= -
e ABBREVIATIONS (cont'd)
TSPA Total System Performance XRD X-ray Diffractometry Assessment YM Yucca Mountain TSPAl Total System Performance YMP Yucca Mountain Project Assessment and Integration YMSCO Yucca Mountain Site Characterization TSw-Chnv Topopah Spring Welded-Calico Office flills Nonvitric YMR Yucca Mountain Region TVD Total Variation Diminishing YTD Year-to-Date TWFN Two White Flint North TWINS Tank Waste Information Network System TWRS Tank Waste Remediation System UA University of Arizona UACll Universidad Autonoma de Chihuahua UCLA University of California Los Angeles !
UDEC Universal Distinct Element Code UK United Kingdom UNM University of New Mexico UR Uranium Recovery U.S. United States USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture USGS U.S. Geologic Survey UTM Universal Transverse Mercator USFIC Unsaturated and Saturated Flow Under Isothermal Conditions UZ Unsaturated Zone VA Viability Assessment VCS Version Control System VF Vitrification Facility VSIP Vertical Slice implementation Plan WAN Wide AreaNetwork WAPDEG Waste Package Degradation WBS Work Breakdown Structure WCIS Waste Containment and Isolation Strategy WFO Work for Others WGB Western Great Basin WIPP Waste Isolation Pitot Plant WMB Waste Management Branch WNYNSC Western New York Nuclear Service Center WOL Wedge-Opening Loading WP Waste Package WSEI Waste Systems Engineering and Integration WSRC Westinghouse Savannah River Company WSS Waste Solidification Systems WTSO Washington Technical Support Office WVDP West Valley Demonstration Prcject WVNS West Valley Nuclear Services WWW World Wide Web XPS X-ray Photoelectron Spectroscopy l 1X
1 EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
-PERIOD 1 In the Division of Waste Management (DWM) Job Code (JC), the Center for Nuclear Waste Regulatory {
Analyses (CNWRA) produced the FY1999 CNWRA Operations Plan for the Repository Program and !
continued preparations for the CNWRA Annual Program Review. The staff continued work on various deliverables and prepared for and engaged in several meetings, including an Appendix 7 meeting in Las Vegas, Nevada; the 1999 Materials Research Society Symposium; and the American Geophysical Union :
Fall Annual Conference. The staff also participated in field trips to the Yucca Mountain Region, eastern i California, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, and Amargosa Valley; submitted letter repor:s on '
Total-system Performance Assessment-related activities; and prepared articles / papers for acceptance in peer-reviewed journals together with presentations at meetings mentioned previously.
The DWM JC year-to-date (YTD) cost variance was 11.1 percent. Spending fell from period 13 FY1998.
CNWRA management staff will discuss staffing and spending in this JC at the CNWRA Annual Program Review.
In the Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) JC, the staff prepared the FY1999 Operations Plan for Technical Assistance Related to TWRS Licensing, worked on the various subtasks, and conveyed a draft report on the chemistry of the Hanford TWRS waste pretreatment technology. The YTD cost variance was
-5.8 percent. Spending rose over period 13 FY1998, accounting for these activities and payment of existing commitments.
In the Three Mile Island Unit 2 (TMI-2) Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI) JC, the CNWRA technical staffpursued preparation ofthe draft safety evaluation report, including evaluation ofthe DOE response to the NRC second round request for additional information (RAI). The YTD cost variance for the TMI-2 ISFSI was 1.5 percent-reflecting this continued activity.
In the Dry Transfer System JC, the staff participated in a DOE /NRC videoconference on the DOE response the NRC first round RAI. The YTD cost variance was - 16.3 percent. Although spending declined over period 13 FY1998, this period overspending resulted from expenditures related to staff involvement in this videoconference.
In the Centralized Interim Storage Facility (CISF) JC, staff pursued evaluation of the DOE response to the NRC RAI and preparation of the draft assessment report. The YTD cost variance for the CISF was ;
4.6 percent. This variance remained positive despite increased spending over period 13 FY1998. l In the Private Fuel Storage Facility JC, the staff visited the PFSF site to gather relevant hydrological and i
geological information. The YTD cost variance was 53.3 percent-reflecting low activity in this area.
l In the Savannah River Site Aluminum-Based Spent Fuel JC, the staff produced the Operations Plan for Technical Assistance on Department of Energy Aluminum Based Spent Nuclear Fuels Disposition. In addition, they worked on review of criticality evaluation of direct codisposal and melt-dilute Al-clad fuels.
The YTD cost variance was 54.8 percent. Spending rose over period 13 FY1998.
l It should be noted that the current spending estimates in all JCs are based on the assumption that staffing is i
at authorized levels. Current staffing remains below authorized levels and recruitment continues.
i Xi l.
i
CNWRA PROGRAM MANAGER'S PERIODIC REPORT ON ACTIVITIES OF THE CENTER FOR NUCLEAR WASTE REGULATORY ANALYSES TITLE: Center for Nuclear Waste Regulatory Analyses (CNWRA)
CONTRACTOR: Southwest Research Institute (SwRI) 6220 Culebra Road, San Antonio, Texas 78238-5166 CONTRACT NO: NRC-02-97-009 9 9
JOB CODES: D1035, J5164, J5186, 35206, J5226,f 5210 NRC CNWRA PROGRAM MANAGER: John J. Linehan,(301)415-7780 NRC CNWRA DEPUTY PROGRAM MANAGER: Deborah A. DeMarco,(301) 415-7804 CNWRA PRESIDENT: Wesley C. Patrick, (210) 522-5158 ESTIMATED BUDGET: $87,611,477 l PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE: 09/27/97-09/27/02 PERIOD OF THIS REPORT: 09/26/98-10/23/98 l
1 TECHNICAL 1.1 CNWRA Operations (COPS) l In addition to a wide range of day-to-day activities, accomplishments in the management and planning area included (i) preparing for the 1998 CNWRA Annual Program Review; (ii) responding to issues related to the Final Guidance for the Development of FY1999 L CNWRA OPS for the Repository Program, and preparing these plans;(iii) conveying the I
Self-Assessment Report on the CNWRA; (iv) providing financial information relative to expected spending for the beginning of FYl999 and reconciling carryover monies for the next FY; (v) further addressing COI-related issues among the NRC, SwRI, and CNWRA l management staffs; and (vi) participating in weekly HLW Management Board meetings.
l-l Status of CNWRA staffing is indicated in table 1, consistent with the revised staffing plan l submitted as part of the revision to the CNWRA Management Plan. During period 1, intensive recruitment efforts and interviews continued for the approved open positions.
Computer system support activities encompassed (i) using consultant support to assist the recently-hired UNIX administrator with installation of SUN Microsystems and Silicon '
Graphics hardware and software associated with the GIS and IMS computing facilities; (ii) continuing the implementation of standardized desktop computer systems;(iii) pursuing a replacement for the CDOCS software; (iv) participating, as requested, in the monthly NRC/CNWRA Computer Coordination meeting; and (v) maintaining LAN operations.
I
. _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ . _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ ~ . _ . _ _ _ _ . . _ . _ - _ . . _
f QA activities focused on (i) accepting additional input on the revision of QAP-016, ,
Procurement Control, to correctly describe CNWRA procurement practices in respon'se to one of the QA audit CARS; (ii) updating the FY1999 QRAM forms; (iii) conducting surveillances, issuing nonconformance reports as required, and working with cognizant staff
- in response to these reports;(iv) leading the configuration control effbrt of the CNWRA ,
scientific and engineering software determined ready for release; (v) controlling issued documents and maintaining QA records; (vi) preventing organizational COls by reviewing SwRI RFPs; (vii) performing QA verification checks on each CNWRA deliverable; and (viii) evaluating potential changes to the CNWRA Quality Assurance Manual, which may be required as flow-down QAPs are revised.
In the next period, the CNWRA staff expects to (i) prepare for the 1998 CNWRA Annual Program Review; (ii) deliver the FY1999 CNWRA OPS; (iii) pursue hiring for open core staff positions; (iv) install computer hardware and software for GIS and IMS computing _
facilities, as well as continue the sea ch for a replacement for the CDOCS software; and (v) provide CNWRA LAN operation and maintenance support.
In addition, the staffwill (i) finalize the procedure regarding procurement and close out the second CAR from the FY1998 CNWRA QA Audit, (ii) proceed with scheduled QA -
surveillances,(iii) perform QA indoctrinations for new CNWRA staff and consultants, (iv) input internal documentation and record copies of delivered documents into QA records, (v) review SwRI RFPs for potential COI, (vi) perform QA verification checks on i each CNWRA outgoing deliverable, and (vii) obtain signatures of ems, technical, director i and QA director on completed QRAM forms that detail technical tasks for FY1999 l CNWRA OPS.
1.2 Igneous Activity (IA)
Staff participated in the October 5-6,1998, Appendix 7 meeting with DOE on disruptive events, in conjunction with review of the DOE TSPA-VA and supporting documentation.
Presentations by R. Barnard (Sandia National Laboratories) clarified staff questions
!' regarding IA models and data presented in the draft DOE TSPA-VA Technical Basis ;
- document. The DOE has not reviewed Revision 0 of the I A IRSR and comments are not ;
i expected during FY1999. Although NRC developed a technical basis for probability subissue resolution, questions remain regarding the DOE approach to IA probability subissues during licensing. DOE presentations at the Appendix 7 reiterated that the annual probability of a new volcano forming through the proposed repository site is less than 10-'
and thus the DOE is not required to evaluate this scenario further. The DOE maintains that the annual probability of a subsurface intrusion intersecting the proposed site, however, is slightly larger than 10-8 and as such will be considered in future pas. The NRC and CNWRA staffs reiterated the need for DOE to consider IA acceptance criteria in the IRSR before reaching programmatic conclusions regarding volcanic disruption scenarios in PA.
All participants in the Appendix 7 meeting agreed that significant uncertainties are associated with models for magma-repository interactions. No new data were presented to evaluate WP behavior during igneous events and many participants agreed more work was needed in these areas.The DOE position regarding postclosure I A appears unchanged from TSPA-VA; no dose is produced by l A during the first 10' yr and average dose consequences 2
5 of volcanic disruption are about.104 rem /yr during 10' yr. NRC analyses show a conservative mean annual risk of approximately 8 mrem /yr.
Preliminary calculations were completed by CNWRA staff and consultants for several aspects of the magma repository interaction subissue. A report on magma-repository interaction authored by two consultants from the University of Bristol was completed this period to augment an earlier report with more detailed analytical solutions. Calculations considered a range of dike geometries, magma pressures, and magmatic volatile contents.
Ascending magma that intersects an open repository drift may accelerate to 1-20 m/s if '
. volatile free, with flow speeds up to 150 m/s possible for magmas with 2-3 percent I dissolved volatiles. These preliminary calculations also indicate that backfill may be displaced in drins by the ascending magma, depending on the coefricient of friction used between the backfill and drift walls.
CNWRA staff calculated the temperatures in the HLW canister at times following the intrusion of magma into the repository drifts and compared these with the cooling time of magma in the drifts. The Heister solution was used to model heat transfer using a range of heat transfer coefficients. These calculations indicate that high temperatures will remain in and around affected HLW canisters for significant amounts of time during an igneous event.
Staff also calculated the fluid pressures in the drift required to initiate vertical fracturing ;
above the drift using the Kirsch solution for the compressive stresses near a conduit or drift. l This fracturing is necessary for magma in' the drifts to ascend directly to the surface. l Preliminary calculations show that fluid pressures associated with magma intrusion into the drifts are sufficiently high (around 1-10 MPa) to propagate vertical fractures through wall j rocks along drift roofs.
Staff also completed Xenolith Formation and the Development of Basaltic Volcanic Conduits During the 1975 Tolbachik Eruptions, Kamchatka, with Implications for Volcanic Hazards Assessments at Yucca Mountain, Nevada-Journal Article (IM 1402-461-905) during this period. This IM was approved and sent to the Journal of Volcanology and ,
Geothermal Research for publication consideration. '
4 In the next period, staff will prepare for and participate in the CNWRA Annual Program Review. Initial designs for the magma-repository interaction experiments will be completed and construction of the experimental apparatus will begin at the University of Bristol. Staff also will prepare presentations for the AGU Fall Annual Conference in early December.
1.3 Structural Deformation and Seismicity (SDS)
Staff completed a letter report on the review of the DOE Geologic Framework Model 3.0.
(Al 1402-471-865). The report concludes the model is adequate for NRC use in assessing the DOE work and in their own evaluations at YM. Although small differences in mis-ties between the stratigraphic contacts in the model and actual contracts based on well data that show up between the DOE mis-tie analysis and CNWRA mis-tie analysis are explainable by differences in the analysis procedure used by these organizations, a few large differences cannot be explained in this manner. Staff continue work on an EarthVision model of the structural framework of the Amargosa trough, identified as 3D Structural Model of Amargosa for input to USFIC-CNWRA Report (IM 1402-471-860). The model will be used as input to saturated flow models by the USFIC KTI Staff also continued writing 3
a
Structural Evolution of Crater Flat, Nevada-Journal Article (IM 1402-471-832). Staff ,
participated in a field trip to review the surficial record of faulting in the YMR led b the Friends of the Pleistocene. SDS staff participated with USFIC staffin identifying sites and boreholes where the vitric and zeolitized Calico Hills Formation can be examined. Staff participated in the October 5-6,1998, Appendix 7 meeting with the DOE on disruptive events, in conjunction with preparation of the draft DOE TSPA-VA and supporting documentation.
The GPS field work in the Volcanic Tablelands of eastern California continued. The GPS work will be used to test alternative models of crustal strain accumulation and release recently advocated by Wernicke et al. in a 1998 Science article. Three GPS controlled traverses, more than 60 km in total length, were run for measuring displacement and position of faults across the tablelands. Twelve paleomagnetic samples were taken to study deformation in the tablelands as a natural analog for deformation in the YMR. Review continued on the DOE draft probabilistic seismic and fault displacement hazard analyses report. Additional minor modifications to the SDS portion of the FY1999 CNWRA OPS were made as a result of management review.
In the next period, staff will continue review of the DOE probabilistic seismic and fault displacement hazard analyses report. The Al on the Input to Review of DOE Geological ,
Framework Model 3.0 EarthVision (Al 1402-471 865) will be submitted.
1.4 Evolution of the Near-Field Environment (ENFE)
Staffcontinued debugging, testing, and documenting the MULTIFLO code Version 1.2p.
The nonphysical saturation spikes produced by the METRA flow module are thought to be a ubiquitous spatial discretization error amplified by severe nonlinearity in the relative permeability curves near the residual water saturation. New semianalytical results for advective / diffusive transport in dual permeability media were developed. These results provided benchmark solutions for successful tests of the new DCM capabilities in the GEM reactive-transport module. Work continues on the semi implicit operator splitting algorithm.
Staffparticipated in a meeting to discuss future requirements for MULTIFLO development.
A paper on PA sensitivity studies related to the dependence of the source term on near-field environmental conditions, which is scheduled for presentation at the Materials Research Society Symposium on the Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management XXII, Boston, Massachusetts, November 30-December 3,1998, was submitted for internal technical and programmatic reviews.
Staffcontinued review of the LLNL near-field and altered-zone models report and the draft DOE TSPA-VA Technical Basis document, particularly Chapter 4, Near-Field Geochemical Environment. Preparations were made to participate in a program review at NRC focusing on coupled THC effects on flow in the proposed repository.
Support was provided for continued development of the FY1999 CNWRA OPS.
In the next period, the staff will continue preparation of the FY1999 CNWRA OPS and review of the draft DOE TSPA VA Technical Basis document. Debugging and benchmarking of MULTIFLO will continue. Near-field radioelement solubility modeling 4
and aqueous actinide chemistry studies will advance. Staffwill participate in an October 29, 1998, meeting at the NRC on coupled TIIC effects on UZ flow. A paper on PA sensitivity studies related to the dependence of the source term on near-field environmental conditions will be submitted for programmatic review.
1.5 Container Life and Source Term (CLST) 1 i
Staff completed the CLST portion of the FY1999 CNWRA OPS and comments were resolved.
Electrochemical corrosion testing, performed to confirm the applicability of repassivation and corrosion potentials as predictive parameters for the long-term, localized corrosion of
)
Alloy 825 in chloride-containing solutions at 95 *C, continued. The specimens were l removed from the test cells, examined for signs oflocalized corrosion, and weighed. After l inspection, all long-term tests were restarted. The mechanism of repassivation was examined by conducting single-pit experiments on pure iron, nickel, chromium, and type 308 SS. The mechanistic studies will be extended to more complex alloys, such as Alloy C-22.
Preparations for stress corrosion cracking tests on Alloy C-22 and type 316L SS continued.
Fatigue precracking and wedge loading ofspecimens are being performed prior to exposure to aqueous environment. For Alloy C-22, testing will be conducted using initial stress intensities of 30 and 40 MPa m". For type 316L SS, specimens will be tested with initial stress intensities of 20 and 40 MPa m".
Localized corrosion testing of Alloy C-22 in solutions with chloride concentrations of 0.5, 1.0, and 4.0 M at temperatures ranging from 95 to 175 *C continues. The results thus far indicate that significant localized corrosion can occur at tem peratures beyond about 125*C.
The results are being analyzed and will be presented at the 1999 Annual Corrosion Conference and included in the proceedings.
The interdependence of solution chemistry, temperature, and potential on localized corrosion of A 516 carbon steel is being investigated in simulated repository environments containing bicarbonate and chloride anions. Long-term corrosion tests cells have been constructed and tests will begin. The results are being analyzed and will be presented at the 1999 Annual Corrosion Conference and included in the proceedings.
Activities were initiated to perform sensitivity analyses using the TPA Version 3.2 code, evaluate the data and model needs for alternate DOE designs and materials, and address issues related to weld corrosion of container materials.
In the t' ext period, long-term corrosion tests of Alloy 825 will continue, as will localized corrosion testing of A 516 carbon steel and Alloys C-22 and 625. Stress corrosion cracking testing of Alloy C-22 will also begin. Sensitivity analyses and review of alternate materials will be initiated.
5
1.6 Thermal Effects on Flow (TEF)
Preliminary modeling of the drift-scale heater test in two dimensions using the dual-continuum concept is currently undenvay and results for the first year of heating have been
! obtained. This preliminary modeling will provide a basis for subsequent model improvemeits. Two TEF KTl staff observed the DOE workshop on thermal testing at LLNL October 14-15,1998. On October 12,1998, one TEF KTl staff member also visited the Thermal Alcove in the ESF to observe the drift-scale heater test.
The second phase of the laboratory-scale boiling isotherm depression heater experiment continued during the reporting period. Dripping from the test cell was observed at the onset of heating and it continued for several weeks before subsiding. It was interpreted the dripping was due to the high initial saturation of the concrete medium. Analysis of results of the first phase experiment continued.
Staff prepared presentation packages for the TEF KTl program review scheduled at TWFN on October 29,1998. Five staff members from three KTIs will make presentations at this program review.
On October 22-23,1998, a TEF KTl staff member participated in a two-day workshop titled Variably Saturated Flow and Transport, on October 22-23, 1998 given by the International Groundwater Modeling Center at Colorado School of Mines, Golden, Colorado. The course instructors were M. Van Genuchten, J. Simunek, and E. Poeter. The sofavare packages Hydrus 1D and 2D were used in the modeling workshop.
In the next period, TEF KTI staff plans to (i) continue the second phase of the boiling isotherm penetration laboratory-scale experiment,(ii) analyze results from the first phase of the laboratory-scale heater test,(iii) test of the MULTIFLO-DCM numerical code in modeling the DOE DST, (iv) evaluate the conceptual model of refluxing, and (v) initiate numerical analyses of natural ventilation in an enclosed emplacement drift.
I 1.7 Repository Design and Thermal-Mechanical Effects (RDTME) l The staff continued the UDEC analyses to predict rockfall under seismic load in the repository thermal environment. This simulation work is expected to provide a technical basis for determining the magnitude of the dynamic impact load on the WPs resulting from rockfall. Also, the results will be used as input to the SEISMO module in the TPA code for disruptive scenario assessment. A problem has been identified in UDEC temperature calculations. Discussion is ongoing with the vendor of the code in solving this problem.
The study of the behavior of rock mass surrounding the emplacement drifts under heated conditions at the repository scale continued during this reporting period. Focus of the study is placed on (i) the rock mass behavior beyond the preclosure period and (ii) the effects of thermal load on permeability changes in the surrounding ro;k mass.
The investigation ofdrift-scale rock mass behavior and its eff:ct on concrete lining stability using UDEC progressed during this reporting period. Staff continued the literature review on concrete performance at high temperature. More related literature has been identified and 6
is being collected. The review will provide valuable information to assess the DOE design of the concrete liner for use at high temperature.
Finite element meshes for WPs are being constructed for investigating effects of rockfall on WP using ABAQUS. The investigation will examine thermal stress of WPs and assess WP responses when subjected to the impact of falling rocks at various times.
One RDTME KTI staffattended the Appendix 7 meeting on scenarios and disruptive events held in Las Vegas, Nevada, October 5,1998, and the DOE workshop on thermal testing at LLNL on October 14-15,1998.
An abstract entitled Effects of Repetitive Seismic Loads on Underground Excavations in Jointed Rock Mass has been accepted for presentation at the 7* International Conference on Radioactive Waste Management and Environmental Remediation to be held in Nagoya, Japan, September 26-30,1999. Preparation of the paper has been initiated.
Preparation ofpresentation material for the CNWRA Annual Program Review related to the RDTME KTI is underway.
In the next period, RDTME KTI staff plans to (i) review the literature collected on cencrete performance at high temperature, (ii) investigate rock mass behavior under heated conditions on both repository and drift scales with an emphasis on long-term degradation of rock mass material properties and strengths, (iii) conduct rockfall simulations, (iv) use the ABAQUS code to model WPs, and (iv) conduct reactive activities including review of design documents.
1.8 Total System Performance Assessment and Integration (TSPAI)
User's Guide for TPA Version 3.2-Letter Report (IM 1402-762-810) was submitted on September 30,1998. It is anticipated that the User's Guide will be extensively referred to by the KTI teams as they exercise the TPA Version 3.2 code to conduct sensitivity analyses l and to quantitatively evaluate the TSPA-VA.
The nomination letter and proposed scope and schedule for conducting the formal external review of the TPA Version 3.2 code were mailed to approximately 140 scientists and engineers having expertise in deep geologic disposal of HLW. Letters and email responses were received from approximately 60 letter recipients. Names ofnominees will be compiled and letters ofinvitation sent to prospective reviewers during the next period.
Input to TPA Version 3.1 Sensitivity Studies Report-Letter Report (IM 1402-761-905).
was submitted on October 21,1998. This two-volume report represents ajoint effort by the NRC and CNWRA staffs and will be published as NUREG-1668, NRC Sensitivity and
( Uncertainty Analyses for a Proposed HLW Repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, Using
!' TPA 3.1. NUREG-1668 will consist of Volume 1: Conceptual Models and Data and
. Volume II: Results and Conclusions.
NRC and CNWRA staff worked on thejoint development of new, simplified methods for
- conducting system-level sensitivity studies with the TPA Version 3.2 code that can be readily adopted and implemented by the KTI teams. The KTI teams will employ these 1
7
methods to conduct sensitivity analyses of the TPA Versinn 3.2 code and to quantitatively ,
evaluate the TSPA-VA.
Significant progress was made on (i) the PC version of the TPA Version 3.2 code,(ii) the Java-based post processor for the TPA Version 3.2 code, and (iii) the PVM implementation of the TPA Version 3.2 code. Problems previously encountered during development of the PC version of the TPA Version 3.2 code, associated with the Lahey Fortran compiler were resolved by moving to a newer version of the compiler. It is anticipated these add-on tasks will be completed and delivered by the end of November.
In the next period, the PA staff will focus on (i) mailing letters ofinvitation to participate in the review of the TPA Version 3.2 code;(ii) completing and delivering the PC and PVM versions of TPA Version 3.2 code and the Java-based post processor for the TPA Version 3.2 code; (iii) preparing and providing guidance to the KTI teams on the conduct of system-level sensitivity analyses with the TPA Version 3.2 code and on review of the TSPA-VA; and (iv) preparing for the Technical Exchange on the TSPAl IRSR to held in San Antonio December 8-9,1998. In addition, recruitment is ongoing for the PA modeler and risk assessment positions.
1.9 Activities Related to Development of the NRC High-Level Waste Regulations (ARDR)
Modeling and evaluating continues on the effects of well characteristics and plume dimensions on dose estimates, which are needed to support development ofattributes ofthe critical group to be used in 10 CFR Part 63. The modeling approach adopted incorporates spatially variable material properties, complex initial and boundary conditions, and multiple pumping wells with variable pumping rates. This period, development progressed on geostatistical models and conditional simulations for the tuff aquifer and efforts began to develop models for the alluvial aquifer.
Efforts to incorporate soil survey map data for the region surrounding YM into the CNWRA GIS database were completed.The information obtained from the Soil Conservation Service provides spatial characterizations of soil taxonomies for the region. These spatial soil data provided an additional coverage of GIS data that can be used with other regional GIS data to support definition of the critical group at YM.
In response to issues brought forward at a recent DOE /NRC technical exchange, the investigation on issues pertaining to calculation of age-specific doses at YM continued.
Investigation of age-specific intakes for use in dose comparisons continued during this period but progress was limited because of other commitments. This work will receive increased priority next period so initial results can be completed.
Staff participated in a one-day field trip to Amargosa Valley to enhance understanding of local characteristics relevant to specification of critical groups and reference biospheres.
Staff noted the presence of a wheat farm and a sorghum farm that were not previously identified in field surveys. Staff also noted stockpiles of large amounts of apparently imported hay for use at the dairy.
There was only minor activity this period on the revisions to the previously issued report, Information and Analyses to Support Selection ofCritical Groups and Reference Biospheres 8
~$
a for. Yucca Mountain Exposure Scenarios, owing to other commitments. The document
- awaits reformatting and production, which is expected next period. The revised report is intended to be issued as a NUREG/CR and will be a key reference document for the rulemaking effort and TSPAl activities.
In the next period, staff will continue to develop flow models for both the tuff and alluvial
- aquifers as part of the borehole dilution study. Assessment of age-specific DCFs will continue and the initial results made available to NRC. If the EPA publishes the draft -
standard, staff will assist the NRC with reviewing it and preparing comments. The revised report, Information and Analyses to Support Selection of Critical Groups and Reference Biospheres for Yucca Mountain Exposure Scenarios, will be formatted for delivery in the
, next period.
1.10 . Unsaturated and Saturated Flow Under Isothermal Conditions (USFIC)
USFIC stafTpanicipated in discussions with the NRC working group investigating structural
, controls on SZ flow at YM. Based on these discussions, USFIC staff established a goal to analyze the potential for and implications of site-scale anisotropy in the fractured tuff aquifer beneath Y,M. This analysis will likely include interpretation of well test data and simplified modeling to assess the effects of anisotropy on flow d;rection.
USFIC staff participated in a field trip to YM to familiarize new staff with the physiography, geology, and hydrology of the area. The first portion of the trip was led by ;
^
the USGS and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation and focused on groundwater discharge areas, surficial deposits, and quaternary movement of faults. The second part of the trip emphasized on YM hydrogeology and groundwater basin discharge to the south. In ;
collaboration with the SDS KTI, a geophysical survey was performed using EM-31 i equipment across a structural feature in Crater Flat. The survey covered an area first '
surveyed last spring, to investigate whether clay or water was controlling the electro-magnetic signals. The previous survey was performed after a significant wet period in May, while the recent survey occurred after the dry summer months. The study was conducted to evaluate the use of geophysical tools to address infiltration in the YMR. USFIC staff are currently interpreting the results of this survey.
Planning continued for a geophysical campaign designed to map the watertable elevation in the YMR using a TDEM method. Integration of TDEM data with data from resistivity and gravity measurements may improve the accuracy of watertable determinations. The areas planned for this survey are Forty Mile Wash and the northern part of the Amargosa Farms region. The survey lines are designed to intersect the flow tubes currently conceptualized in PA.
SZ modeling was conducted to calibrate the site-scale 3D model that was extracted from the USGS regional model. Calibration of the site-scale model will be performed with inversion routines in the PEST code and using existing watertable data.
Studies of spatial heterogeneity of infiltration and potential future changes to
. precipitation / runoff relationships in Solitario Canyon and in a small watershed above the EW crossdrift continued. Anslysis of tipping bucket precipitation data led to the reanalysis 9
of seasonal runoff and infiltration events. A refined topographic map of the small watershed ,
is being used to delineate planes and channels for runoff / infiltration modeling.
Characterization continued of nonwelded vitric layers below the potential repository horizon. Preliminary apparent thickness maps were constructed of the vitric nonwelded and zeolitic horizons. Geophysical data are being plotted against mineral logs and x-ray diffraction data. The characterization of strata in the basal Topopah Springs, Calico Hills Unit, and Prow Pass Tuff is being used to support alternative conceptual models for flow and transport from the repository horizon to the watertable.
A seepage model, developed using the MULTIFLO code, was benchmarked against an analytical upper bound formula for capillary diversion and found to produce acceptable results. This comparison was made to investigate the capillary barrier concept applied to model seepage into drifts under isothermal conditions. Sensitivity analyses are being conducted on the volume of seepage as a function of deep percolation compared to the fracture permeability and van Genuchten alpha for steady-state 2D flow. Results of these analyses will support review of the draft DOE TSPA-VA Technical Basis document.
Continuing analysis of C-Well pump-test data consisted mainly of reducing newly obtained data to a useable format by filtering atmospheric ptessure effects from the water pressure data.
USFIC staff began technical review of chapter 2 of the draft DOE TSPA-VA Technical Basis document. This chapter deals with UZ hydrology.
In the next period, USFIC activities will include (i) interpretation of data from CNWRA field studies at YM, (ii) progress on alternative conceptual models for flow and transport from the potential repository to the watertable,(iii) progress on approaches for modeling future infiltration,(iv) continued development ofconceptual models for seepage into drifts, (v) review of the DOE UZ model of YM, (vi) preparation of a 3D subregional site-scale flow and transport model, (vii) ongoing interaction with the NRC working group on structural controls on groundwater flow,(vHi) continued efforts toward interpreting data from C-Well hydraulic and tracer tests, and (ix) review ofchapters 2 and 7 of the draft DOE
! TSPA-VA Technical Basis document.
1.11 Radionuclide Transport (RT)
Two manuscripts were completed and submitted for CNWRA and NRC reviews. The manuscripts will be submitted for publication in the proceedings volume of the Materials Research Society Symposium on the Scientific Basis forNuclear Waste Management XXII, Boston, Massachusetts, November 30-December 3,1998. The first manuscript (IM 1402-l 871-910), Sorption Modeling for PA-Materials Research Society Manuscript, with publication title, Radionuclide Sorption at Yucca Mountain, Nevada-Demonstration ofan Alternative Approach for PA, outlines an approach for developing site-specific constraints on Ko PDFs for PA abstractions and provides a discussion of spatial distributions of calculated Ko in the vicinity of YM. The second manuscript (IM 1402-871-920), UZ Chemistry at a Natural Analog Site-Materials Research Society Manuscript, with
! publication title, Unsaturated Zone Waters from the Nopal I Natural Analog, Chihuahua, j Mexico-Implications for Radionuclide Mobility at Yucca Mountain, focuses on 1
10 I
4 geochemical modeling and U-series interpretation of Nopal waters. Models suggest that uraninite dissolution under open-system, oxidizing conditions-such as may occur in the proposed YM repository-may initially lead to schoepite precipitation, allowing higher l dissolved U contents in released waters than if uranyl silicates were controlling aqueous U.
Geochemical calculations were performed on the equilibrium behavior of U in J-13 waters used in DOE sorption experiments. These calculations addressed the possibility that U may have exceeded mineral solubility limits in these experiments, casting doubt on applicability of these calculations for sorption modeling. Using default thermodynamic data, uranyl silicates haiweeite and soddyite were calculated to have been supersaturated in all experiments (U = 0.05 mg/L and up). Using an alternative source for the soddyite solubility constant yielded soddyite supersaturation only in the highest U experiments (33 mg/L).
These results suggest that U mineral saturation should be considered a possible factor in interpreting sorption experiments.
An extended abstract entitled Stochastic Analysis of Transport and Retention in a Multiple Fracture Pathway was accepted for presentation at the Witherspoon Symposium on Dynamics of Fluids in Fractured Rock, Berkeley, California, February 10-12,1998.The abstract describes a new stochastic model for transport through fractured rock combining sorption, matrix diffusion, and large-scale uncertainty in advection velocity. A manuscript for a journal article on the same work is being prepared. A draft manuscript on the application of sorption modeling for PA calculations was submitted for internal review.
Reviews continued on a manuscript including an evaluation ofdata (published literature and unpublished CNWRA results) on ion exchange between aqueous solutions and the zeolite mineral clinoptilolite.
Mineral preparation and surface area analyses for quartz-clinoptilolite mixed mineral sorption experiments were completed during this period. Experiments to examine U sorption on quartz began. To determine the effects of CO2 conditions on U sorption, the experiments are conducted with solutions both open and closed to the atmosphere.
Approximately 215 g ofque was prepared with a surface area to mass ratio of 0.304 m2 fg, The surface area analyses on quartz ( 0.044-0.004 mm particle diameter) and mixture of quartz and clinoptilolite with three different ratios (0.lg/L,1.0g/L, and 10g/L) were com pleted. Uranium-233 sorption experiments on quartz continued with open to atmosphere and with capped vials to minimize carbon dioxide availability. The sorption step on open-to-atmosphere containers was completed. Sample preparation for liquid scintillation analysis continued.
CNWRA staff continued to assist the NRC staffin finalizing the RT IRSR. CNWRA staff also supported development of the FY1999 CNWRA OPS.
In the next period, technical and programmatic reviews of the manuscripts for publication in the Materials Research Society Symposium on the Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management XXII will be completed and submitted to the meeting organizers.
l Presentations also will be prepared for the meeting. RT team members will participate in j the CNWRA Annual Program Review. There will be continued laboratory analysis, l including multiple-mineral experiments. RT staff will assist in the PA abstraction process.
The staff will support completion of the FY1999 CNWRA OPS.
11
1.12 Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) .
In subtask 1.2, staff is continuing to work on the Low-Activity Waste Feed Makeup, Solidification, and Offgas Technology and Process System Hazard and Safety Issues Report for TWRS-Letter Report (IM 1403-102-932).
In subtask 1.6, Chemistry of Hanford Tank Waste Remediation System Waste Pretreatment Technology-Draft was sent on October 23,1998. This report was 75 percent complete (with draft tables and figures) and follows the NRC-approved outline. It has been forwarded as an Al for review. The milestone number given for the Al will be changed to the IM number after incorporating the NRC comments (IM 1403-106-915). The delivery date for the final report is December 28,1998.
In subtask 2.1, formerly subtask 1.8, based on NRC guidance for reviewing the DOE-RU Evaluation of the BNFL Initial Safety Analysis and Safety Requirements document, the CNWRA issued two reports addressing 64 of 90 open items categorized in four different areas. Part 11 of the report titled " Assessment of DOE Regulatory Unit Initial Safety Evaluation Report of the BNFL,Inc., ISA Package Open items-Part II" was sent to NRC on October 6,1998 as IM 1403-201-910. CNWRA received NRC input on the remaining 26 open items. Currently, NRC comments have been incorporated in the report and it is undergoing internal technical and programmatic reviews. The report will be submitted as IM 1403-201-920 on November 10,1998.
In subtask 2.2, an outline for writing the inspection plan for TWRS is being developed.
FY1999 Operations Plan for Technical Assistance Related to TWRS Licensing, Rev. 2, Chg 0, was modified based on additional guidance to add review of Hanford Immobilized Low-Activity Waste Performance Assessment under subtask 2.1 (IM 1403-201-930) and awaits transmittal with other OPS.
In the next period, activities in subtask 1.2 will continue on the Low-Activity Waste Feed Makeup, Solidification, and Offgas Technology and Process System Hazard and Safety issues Report for TWRS-Letter Report (IM 1403-102-932). In subtask 2.1, responses to the remaining BNFL open items will be fonvarded (IM 1403-201-920).
1.13 Three Mile Island Unit 2 Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (TMI-2 ISFSI)
During this period, preparation of the draft SER continued, including evaluation of the DOE response to the NRC second round RAI. The draft SER will be documented as Safety Evaluation Report-Draft Letter Report (IM 1405-014-910).
In the next period, TMI-2 ISFSI staff plans to continue evaluation of the DOE response to the NRC second round RAI and complete preparation of the draft SER.
1.14 Dry Transfer System (DTS)
The staff participated in the DOE /NRC video conference on the DTS first round RAI on October 19,1998. Two staff and one consultant visited NRC to participate in this meeting, 12
while othe CNWRA staff members of the DTS SAR review team participated from the
. video conference facility at SwRI.
In the next period, staff plans to aegin preparation of the draft SER, while waiting for the DOE response to the first ro' nd RAl.
1.15 Centralized Interim Storage Facility (CISF)
Evaluation of the DOE response to the NRC RAI and preparation of the draft AR continued.
This draft AR will be documented for submission as Assessment Report-Draft Letter Report (IM 1405-031-840). Two CISF staff visited the NRC on October 19,1998, to discuss the draft AR.
In the next period, staff plans to complete preparation of the draft AR and assess the scope of work associated with the potential revision of the computer code RISKIND.
1.16 Private Fuel Storage Facility (PFSF)
One CNWRA staff and a consultant visited the PFSF site on October 14,1998, to gather relevant hydrological and geological information. Work began on the first group of PFSF contentions during this period.
In the next period, PFSF staff plans to continue activities related to the PFSF proceeding before the ASLB.
1.17 Savannah River Site Aluminum-Based Spent Fuel (SRSASF)
The criticality evaluation of direct codisposal and melt-dilute Al-clad fuels is being reviewed. The review comments will be provided as a letter report, Review of Criticality Evaluation of Direct Codisposal and Melt-Dilute Fuels (IM 1407-001-905). This report will be transmitted on November 20,1998, as part of the FY 1999 activities in place ofan earlier milestone in FY1998, Review of Additional Information Supplied by the DOE on Disposition of Al-based Spent Nuclear Fuel (IM 1407-001-830). The FY1999 Operations Plan for Technical Assistance on Department of Energy Aluminum Based Spent Nuclear Fuels Disposition Program, Rev.1, Chg. 0, was prepared and awaits transmittal with other HLW OPS plans.
In the next period, a letter report, Review of Criticality Evaluation of Direct Codisposal and Melt-Dilute Fuels (IM 1407-001-905), will be transmitted.
2' MANAGEMENT ISSUES None to report.
3 MAJOR PROBLEMS None to report.
13
4
SUMMARY
OF SCHEDULE CHANGES .
Schedule changes for IMs are included in table 2. Completed deliverables are noted on table 3.
5
SUMMARY
OF FINANCIAL STATUS Table 4 summarizes the CNWRA financial status in the context of authorized funds. Total commitments are $ 174,140. The appendix lists planned and actual costs to date, as well as variances between these, without allowance for fee, on both a per-period and a cumulative basis. These data do not include commitments. Pertinent financial information is provided for the DWM JC, including COPS and 10 KTis, TWRS JC, TMI-2 ISFSI JC, DTS JC, CISF JC, PFSF JC, and SRS ASF JC. The planned costs per period are based on the revised spending plans contained in the CNWRA OPS for the Repository Program, Revision 11, Change 0, for the DWM JC; TWRS OPS, Revision 2, Change 0, for the TWRS JC; SFPO OPS, Revision 1, Change 6, for the TMI-2 ISFSI, DTS, CISF, and PFSF JCs; and SRSASF OPS, Revision 1, Change 0, for the SRSASF JC.
It should be noted the current spending estimates in all JCs are based on the assumption that staffing is at authorized levels. Staffing remains below authorized levels and accelerated recruitment is in progress. An updated stafYing plan was delivered as part of Revision 6, Change 3, to the CNWRA Management Plan.
Period 1 FY 1999 CNWRA composite expenditures fell 3.8 percent from period 13 FY1998, and this aggregate of all JCs was underspent by $97,926 or 9.9 percent for thh initial period in FY1999.
When comparing period 1 FY1999 with period 13 FY1998, the DWM, DTS, and PFSF JCs evidenced lower spending levels, while the TWRS, TMI-2 ISFSI, CISF, and SRSASF JCs showed higher levels.
The DWM JC was underspent by $91,124 or 11.1 percent. Overall expenditures decreased 9.9 percent from period 13 FY1998 as costs rose in the CLST, ARDR, and USFIC KTis, but declined in COPS and the IA, SDS, ENFE, TEF, RDTME, TSPA, and RT KTis.
j The TWRS JC was overspent by $3,900 or -5.8 percent. This overspending was primarily the result l of delayed payments to consultants and subcontractors.
The TMI-2 ISFSI JC was underspent by $659 or 1.5 percent. Costs rose from period 13 FY1998 as additional CNWRA staff engaged in the preparation of the draft SER and the evaluation of the DOE response to the second round RAI.
The DTS JC was overspent by $ 1,731 or -16.3 percent. Relatively small initial allocation of funding l coupled with staff participation at the DOE /NRC videoconference on respons.e to the NRC first l
round RAI caused the cost overrun. ;
The CISF JC was underspent by $1,282 or 4.6 percent. Expenses rose significantly from period 13 FY 1998, however, as this increase resulted from the evaluation ofthe DOE response to the NRC first round RAI for incorporation into a draft AR together with a visit by CNWRA staff to discuss this i draft AR with the NRC staff.
The PFSF JC was underspent by $5,725 or 53.3 percent. This underspending is primarily because of reallocation of staff to other higher priority areas.
14 1
l !
l l
The SRSASF JC was underspent by $4,766 or 54.8 percent. Spending increased over period 13 j
FY1998, however, as staff pursued review of the criticality related to direct codisposal fuels. This increase may be attributed to preparation of a letter report and the SRSASF section in the operations plan.
1 The CNWRA expenditures on SwRI labor, consultants, and subcontractors as a proportion of composite spending on all JCs were 18.5 percent. The CNWRA expense on consultants and subcontractors as a fraction of composite spending on all JCs was 10.9 percent. The CNWRA remains committed to enhance, where appropriate, participation of consultants and subcontractors in the conduct of CNWRA work.
l As shown in table 1, the CNWRA has 47 core and one limited-term staff members. The CNWRA updated the staffing plan portion of the Management Plan, reflected in table 1. The available pool I of approved consultants and subcontractors rose to 48.
1 This FYTD no capital or sensitive equipment was purchased with NRC funds (other than overhead, l
general and administrative expenses, and fees).
DWMJC The DWM JC cumulative cost variance was 11.1 percent. Expenditures in this JC decreased by 3.8 percent over period 13 FYl998. Specific explanations for over/ underspending for COPS and each KTI follow.
The cost variance for COPS was 18.4 percent: 17.8 percent for the Management, Planning, and Computer Support subtask (1402-158) and 20.9 percent for the QA subtask (1402-159). Spending in both subtasks fell relative to last period. In the next period, expenses in both subtasks are expected to follow estimates.
The cost variance for the IA KTI was -0.9 percent. Spending is anticipated to remain stable in the next period as FY1999 CNWRA OPS are implemented.
The cost variance for the SDS KTI was 4.7 percent. It is anticipated that spending in the next few periods of FY1999 will continue at the same rate.
The cost variance for the ENFE KTl was 44.2 percent. This variance is likely to persist until additional staff are available.
The cost variance for the CLST KTl was -25.4 percent. The overspending resulted from increased activity related to completion of the IRSR and participation in workshops related to the TEF KTl and welding of Alloy C-22 sponsored by the Nickel Development Institute The cost variance for the TEF KTI was 30.4 percent. The underspending reflects reallocation of staff to other areas. This variance may decline during the next few periods as newly hired staff work on TEF KTI activities.
The cost variance for the RDTME KTI was 2.7 percent. Actual expenditures are expected to continue following the budget for the next period.
l l 15 1
The cost variance for the TSPAI KTl was 15.1 percent. The cost variance and spending rate are .
expected to remain roughly the same during period 2 of FY1999.
The cost variance for the ARDR KTI was 40.1 percent. There is still no indication the draft EPA Standard will be released for review in the coming months, so underspending will continue and may even increase during period 2 of FY1999 unless new tasking is received.
The cost variance for the USFIC KTI was -19.4 percent. This negative varian::e resulted from trailing costs from FY1998 and is likely to be reduced in coming periods.
The final cost variance for the RT KTl at the end of this period was 18.6 percent. This variance is, likely to persist, and to increase somewhat, until additional staff are available. /
The cost variance for the TWRS project was -5.8 percent. Overspending is a result of FY1998 payments to consultants and subcontractors.
The cost variance for the TMI-2 ISFSI project was 1.5 percent. Actual expenditures during this first period of FY1999 are close to the budgeted amount.
The cost variance for the DTS project was - 16.3 percent. This cost overrun is due to allocation of small amount of funding for the first three periods of FY 1999 compared to total FY1999 budget for DTS.
The cost variance for the CISF project was 4.6 percent. Actual expenditures are expected to remain close to the budgeted amount.
The cost variance for the PFSF project was 53.3 percent. This cost underrun is primarily due to reallocation of staff to complete the AR for the CISF project and SER for TMI-2 project. This cost underrun will decrease significantly during the next few periods as the work on PFSF continues and the preparation of the PFSF SER is initiated.
The cost variance for the SRSASF was 54.8 percent. Spending is expected to increase slightly in the next reporting period owing to completion of the review ofcriticality ofdirect codisposal fuels. DOE is cxpected to transmit additional reports toward the beginning of the second quarter of FY1999, at which time the review activity is expected to increase.
16
\
1 Table 1. CNWRA Core Staff-Current Profile and Hiring Plan * (Period 1) !
Positions Open Empertime/Esperience Current No. Professional Staff FYl998 ADMINISTRATION 4 H GARCIA. W. PATRICK. J RUSSELL, B.SAGAR
{
OIEMICAL PROCESSING 2 VJAIN, D DARUWALLA .
ENGNG/ PHYS. CHEM.
CODE ANALYSIS / DEVELOPMENT 2 RJANETZKE, R. MARTIN I DATA MANAGEMENT / PROCESSING. I PMALDONADO l
INCLUDING FINANC1j',
DOSE / RISK /IIAZARD ANALYSIS 0 1
ELECTROCHEMISTRY l G.CRAGNOLINO ENGINEERING 2 R,CHEN, G.0FOEGBU l- GEOLOGY / GEOLOGICAL ENGNG.
1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES l P.LaPLANTE
[ GEOCHEMISTRY 5 W. MURPHY, R.PAB ALAN, E.PEARCY, J.PRIKRYL.
I D TURNER GEOlIYDROLOGY/lfYDROGEOLOGY 4 R.FEDORS. R GREEN. J.WINTERLE. D.FARRELL I GEOLOGY 2f t)t L.McKAGIE M MIKLAS. P.LAFEMINAt I!YDROLOGIC11ANSPORT 3 A.ARMSTRONG, $. PAINTER. D. HUGHSON INFORMATION MANAGEMENT I R. KOTARA l SYSTEMS MATERIAL SCIENCES 3 D DUNN. N.SRIDHAR. S BROSSIA i MEDIANICA1, 0 i INCLUDING DESIGN & FABRICATION MINING ENGINEERING I S.M HSIUNG l.. NUCLEAR ENGINEERING 1 MJARZEMBA OPERATIONAL HEALTH PHYSICS ' 2 J WELDY. L.DEERE PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT 2 S.MOllANTY, G WTITMEYER 2 QUALITY ASSURANCE I B MABRITO RADIOlSOTOPE GEOGIEMISTRY I D PICKETT ROCK MECHANICS, 2 A.CIIOWDifURY, A.GilOSH
- l. INCLUDING CIVI!JSTRUC. ENGNG.
SOURCE. TERM / SPENT FUEL DEGRAD. O I STRUCTURAL GEOLOGY / 3 D.FERRILL, J.STAMATAKOS, D.SIMS SEISMO. TECTONICS SYSTEMS ENGINEERING I P.MACKIN i VOLCANOLOGY / IGNEOUS PROCESSES 2 C.CONNOR. B HILL l
(' TOTAL 47(l)t 8
- See Staffing plan fOr details t
t Limited term 4
I-t 17 e
.c -
e ~
n t
o s
l e
E i m
G e N ta A i d
H e C m r
R t e
O i n
F is E ht L f A o N n O i o
I i t
T d A d a
R t s
e u
q e
R D
EE ST I
L A 9 NE I T 9
/
4 GA 1
/
R D I
7 0
O N k c
O o I
T R
P n r I
o e s p R is a
)
C lyP S a la 1 E nn d D Ar u
. i o yr l o.
r a e i -s l
P
(
ixl ul a s AF e
g n
a h
C E P
l e Y M I
u T d
e h
c S
f R o E y B
. r M 0 a U 2 9-m N 1 m E 7 u N 6-O 2 S. T 0 4
2 S 1 e E l L b I a M T
5 llll, lj
Table 3. Deliverables (Period 1) .
ORIGINAL ACTUAL J MILESTONE COMPLETION REVISED 4-l COMPLETION REASON NO. TYPE DESCRIPTION DATE DATE RE\ :Cyh DAE (IF DELAYED) 1402-461-905 IM Subsurface. Area of Disruption for 10/16/98 10/15S 8 Basaltic Volcanoes-Journal Article 1402-761-905 IM Input to TPA 3.1 Sensitivity Studies 10/2168 _10/21/98 Report-LetterReport(Vols I andII) 1402-762-810 IM User's Guide for TPA Version 3.2- 09/30/98 09/29/98 Letter Report 1403-201-910 IM Assesstnent of DOE RU Initial Safety 10/09/98 10/06/98 Evaluation Report of the BNTL,Inc.
ISA Package Open Item-Part II.
Table 4. Financial Status (Period 1) ,
Funds Funds Funds Authorized Casted te Date Uncessed Commitmenes Project Names 2.030.552 1.6 % .406 334.146 7.702 COPS 855.063 754.541 100.522 31.581 (A
1.145.148 1.001.245 143.902 44.320 SDS 984.875 705.649 189.226 42.654 ENFE 860.880 741.105 119.775 10.107 CLST 763.502 633.719 129,784 5.208 TEF 580.806 473.459 107.347 700 RDTME 2.081.108 1.595.906 485.112 7.020 TSPAl 296.357 214.392 81.966 0 ARDR 1.261.265 1.084.290 176.% 7 8.054 USFIC 612.721 475.338 147.382 5.170 RT DWM Costs 11.482.278 0.466.149 2.016.129 D%N Award Fee 563.865 260.531 303.334 D%V Base Fee 450.291 368.057 91.234 12.505.414 10.094.737 2.410.607 163.506 TOTAL DWW 093.386 853.504 139.792 7.322 TWRS Costs TWRS Award Fee 47.643 22.741 24.902 TWRS Base Fee 39.735 33.266 6.470 1.080.764 009.600 171.164 7.322 TOTAL 1TRS 207.370 178.004 28.466 0 TMi-2 ISFS! 5AR Costs 0.191 5.585 3,606 TM1-2 ISFSI SAR Award Fee TM1-21SFSI Base Fee 8.295 6.017 1.378 224.856 101.405 33.450 0 TUTAL TMI-2 ISFSI SAR 171.085 148.984 22.101 500 DTS Costs DTS Award Fee i1.175 7.774 3.401 UTS Base Fee 6.843 5.752 1.091 I R9.104 162.510 26.594 500 TUTAL DTS 270.781 248.804 30.887 1.500 CISF Costs CISF Award Fee 11.245 6 203 7.042 CISF Base Fee 11.191 0.613 1.579 TUTAL CISF 304.217 264.700 30.508 1.500 PFSF Costs 142.044 120.298 21.745 1.312 PFSF Award Fee 8.310 3.512 4.798 PFSF Base Fee 5.682 4.645 1.037 TOTAL PFSF 156.035 128 455 27.580 1.312 SRSASF Costs 94.102 70.227 23.874 0 SRSASF Awsrd Fee 6.340 3.351 2,989 SRSASP Base Fee 3.764 2.717 1.047 TOTAL SRSASF 104.206 76.206 27.910 0 Grand Total 14 564 616 1I.827.713 2 736 003 174.140 Note All autixmred fbuds have been allocated 20
Table 5. Private Fuel Storage Facility License Fee Cost Recovery Status (Period I) ,
LICENSE FEE COST RECOVERY STATUS JOB CODE: 35226 TITLE: Private Fuel Storage Facility PERIOD: September 26-October 23,1998 TAC OR INSPECTION TASK DOCKET IDENTIFICATION PERIOD CUMULATIVE COSTS NUMBER FACILITY NAME NUMBER NUMBER COSTS CONTRACT TO DATE 20-1405-041 Private Fuel Storage 72-22 L22462 $5,217.45 $124,942.80 '
Facility Note: Costs include 4 percent actual base fee but not award fee, which is determined annually.
b e
N__-. . - . - - . . - - _ . _ . . . . - _ _ - -.-- _-_ _ _-___--__ - __ _ x __-_.---- - _ _ _ -- ---= .- _
. .- .. .. . . . . _- - ._= ..- ,..-.--. - .- ..- - - - -. .. .-
4..
T 4
i APPENDIX 4
Planned and Actual Costs,
- j. and Cost Variances t.
Period 1-FY1999 4
4 2
1 i
j s
4-n 4
b i
b i
i j
i j
1 1
1 i
I i
CNWRA(X)MPOSTIE TOTAL.ES11MA7E COST -
. ITEM 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 - 08 09 to 11 12 13 Tosal FE N Cost 986.944 946.700 956.845 1.061.835 1.049.966 1.063.564 1.049.787 1.038.673 1.016.165 1.025.694 981.736 1.015.141 979.956 986.944 Act N Cost 889.038 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 889.018 Vanance. $ 97.926 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 97.926 Vc7sance. % 99% 0.0% 00% 00% 00% 0.0% 00% 0.0% 00% 00% 0.0% 0.0% 00% 99%
Est FY Osmul 986.944 1.933.644 2.890.489 3.952.324 5.002.290 6.065.854 7.115.642 8.1543 15 9.170.481 10.1 %.175 11.177.912 12.193.053 13.173.009 Ac1 FY Cumul 889.018 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
% Compiene 6.7% 00% 00% 00% 00% 00% 00% 0.0% 00% 00% 00% 00% 00%
Cumul var. $ ' 97.926 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Osmul Var. % 9.9% 00% 00% 0.0% 0.0% 00% 00% 00% 00% 00% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
DIVISION OF WASTE MANACEMFNT(DWM) .
I402 6 TIEM 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 Total Est N Cbst 817.640 823.053 838.930 91I.688 903.703 913.289 902.157 914.582 900.757 917.226 899,870 922.854 899.011 817.640 Act N Cost 726.516 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 726.516 Vanance. $ 91,524 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 98.124 Vanance. % II I% 0.0% 00% 00% 00% 0.0% 00% 0.0% 00% 00% 0.0% 0.0% 00% 11.1 %
EO FY Osmut 817.640 1.640.693 2.479.623 3391304 4.295.007 5.208.2 % 6.110.453 7.025.035 7.925.792 8.843.018 9.742.888 10.665.742 11.564.753 l
Act FY Cumul 726.516 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
% Complete 63% 00% 00% 00% 00% 00% 00% 00% 00% 00% 00% 00% 00%
Osmul Var. $ 91.124 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cumul Var % 11.1 % 00% 00% 00% 00% 00% 0.0% 0.0% 00% 00% 00% 0.0% 00%
(
>d CNWRA OPERATIONS (COPS) 1402-150 ITEM 01 02 03' 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 II 12 13 Total Est N Cbst I44.173 144.172 144.170 144.923 144.756 145.013 144.688 145.256 144.595 145.289 144.238 146.128 144.021 144.173 Act N Cost 117,636 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 117.636 Vanence, S 26.535 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26.535 Variance % 184% 00% 0.0% 00% 00% 00% 00% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 00% 0.0% 00% 184%
EO FY Onnut 144.171 288343 432.513 577.4 % 722.192 867.205 1.011.893 1.157.149 1301.745 1.447.034 1.591.246 I.737.374 I.883395 Act FY Cumul 117.636 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O Campiete 63% 00% 0.0% 00% 00% 0.0% 00% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 00% 00% 00%
Cumul var. $ 26.535 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cumul Var. % 18 4 % 00% 00% 00% 00% 00% 00% 00% 00% 00% 00% 00% 00%
3 8 1 E 3 3 $ 2 0 3 3 0
- 5 9 h g s
- 5 i Y d 4 h y 9 i o o g - o g o g o o g m o g o g o o $ * $ * $
E s o 3 o o , =?
o o ? o o .
9 o =$ = o 3
= _3, m o o g g a g a g a
- o 1 % @
- g g $ m * $ g o o o ? o o ~ o 2 o o
, - o ~ $ g -
m
. g
_ m g - -
g 3 o o 1 2 o 1
$ 2
- g n o o g 2 o g a o ? o o _ g o p o o _
g o O o o 0, o -
=
n x
= = o g o g o g = o o @ g o g o $ $ o o g
- o g * $
o n a n o o o g a s e o o n o g
. o o
_ a g _ -
3 o g
- n o o @
- o g a g =
- o g A o @ o g g o
- o ? o o o o o g ? o ? o o g 2
- g g
- 4 _
3 p A
m o
m 6 a o @
g
- g
$ A
- g I * $ $ @ A g ? ! o g g
- g s 2 3 g g- =
a 8 3 @
e z E $ 3 m
6 g l
$ m 5
- g g g g E *
$ 4 3 o * @ 3
- g o @ 2 1 E h g o j = = 3 o y o o e = 0 o o
>g ? R S -
o "
B ' o *
@2 c a
(~3 m
fZ
<3 d3 P 3 a S g z t
g R o o 1 0
- g o $ m j
- o g R g o 1 *
- o o @ t o 2 o g g '.o o *
- d o 8 ?
o o o Q o *
- b 8 6 l
a E : 8 3 z 6 8 o o g = = g o g = = g n o g = g
- o a o g o a
- o B a r m ; o y o o 5 m ?o 6 0 o o 9 S o ? o o o ,
o g w m. . g l
1
% o
- g g
- g o 8 o 8 o 1 o g o o g g a g = g 6 x *
- g ? = a o = g ? o ,-
- 6 a p e
- n ~ -
l t
l
- o 2 o o g o g o g l 8 g n * $ o g a R o g o g l m ; = g = o , so o ? = o - 3 o s 6 6 o * ,
o g o - g R
- g A g $ g o * $ o g * $ g o o g R o g o g a 3
- j
- a g
- s 2 =
j = =
s - - e s . . . , -
R R s 1 R 8 e 2 1 R a x
- 4 s e e ; * * * , * $
3 7 1 9 4 4 4 1 9 3 3 ? ? 3 i ? ~c 0 # # M 3 d i % M g l
l * @ 3 3 m @ 3 3 m $
~
4 O Y Y h 4 4 h Y h h $ 4 h h z z l { t t a a > > a a . e 8 i i
' z z a n l l
> > a t t a
s i i
. e e d z z j g e t g j i a a > > a a . e e A-2
CONTAINER UFE AND 50URCE 11ERM (CLST) , l 1402-570 ITEM 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 to Il 12 13 Total I'O N Cost 62,502 62,588 63,460 75.729 75,033 75.854 74.973 75.890 74.971 75,950 74.938 76.208 74.727 62.502 ,
Act N Cost 78,364 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 78,364 Variance,5 (15.862) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (15,8621 Vanance. % 25.4% 0.0% 0.0% 00% 00% 00% 0.0% 0.0% 00% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% -25.4%
Est IY Oamut 62,502 125.090 188,550 264.279 339.312 415,166 490,139 566.029 641.000 716.950 791.888 868.096 942.823 Act FY Oamul 78.364 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
% Compkte 8.3% 00% 00% 00% 00% 00% 0.0% 00% 0.0% 0.0% 00% 0.0% 0.0%
Cumul Var. $ (15.862) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cumul Var, % 25.4 % 0.0% 00% 00% 0.0% 00% 00% 0.0% 0.0% 00% 0.0% 0 09 0.0%
T1{ERMAL EITTfl3 ON Fl.DW (TEF) 1402 460 TIEM 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 il 12 13 Total 52,306 52,308 57.046 56.424 57.220 56,394 57,221 56.332 57.407 56.331 58.052 56,218 52,306 Est Pd Cost 54.269 Act Pd Cost 36.405 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 36.405 Vanance,5 15,901 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15.901 Vanance, % 30.4 % 00% 00% 00% 00% 0.0% 00% 0.0% 0.0% 00% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 30.4 %
52,306 158,883 215.929 272.353 329.573 385.964 443.185 499.517 556,924 613,255 678,307 727,524 Est FY Cumul 104.614 36,405 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
>e Act IY Cumul 0
% Complete 5.0% 00% 0.0% 00% 00% 00% 00% 00% 00% 00% 0.0% 0.0% 00%
ba Cumul Var. $ 15,901 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cumul Var. % 30 4 % 00% 00% 00% 00% 00% 00% 00% 00% 00% 00% 00% 0.0%
REPOStrORY DESIGN AND THERMAL-MECllANICAL EITI CIS (RDTME) 1402.670 TIT.M 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 Total 49,317 60.421 59.784 60.505 59.784 60,782 59.782 60,8 % 59,782 61.267 59,781 49,201 Est N Cat 49.201 49.103 Act N Cost 47.865 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 47.865 Vanance,$ 1,336 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,336 Votance. % 2.7% 00% 0.0% 00% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 00% 00% (s.0% 00% 0.0% 0.0% 2.7%
Est FY Cumut 49.201 98.518 147.621 208.042 267.826 328,331 388.185 448,897 508,679 569,575 629.357 690.624 750.405 Act FY Cumul 47,865 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
% Complete 64% 0.0% 0.0% 0,0% 00% 00% 00% 00% 00% 00% 0.0% 00% 0.0%
Cumul Var. $ 1.336 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cumul Var. % 2.7% 0.0% 00% 00% 00% 0.0% 0.0% 00% 0.0% 0.0% 00% 0.0% 0.0%
^
J
$ " " 2 E f E b !
i 8 ~ - g y I. n y I C. 8 s$
s M_ R ~
[ M 3 d p E E_ C_
"T g o o $ 2 o $ $ 0 *
$ 2 $ *
$ A * $ 0 $ $
m j o y o o m $ o ~- o o m
~
[- o $ o o O 8, O 3 n _~
E o o $ M o $ * $ g * * $ $ $ R $ j- $
n Q 6 Q o o n 4 o q'4 o o n
~
g o o$ o
~
- 3 2 3, 5 R o @ j
$ $ "- C * *
$ 0 $ * $ 2 *
$ 0 " $ * $
_ y o g o o .
$ o y o o _
~
Z- o g o o
~ ~
- 2
= R, R 2, 6 -
5
% o
@ $ * $ g 3 $ M $ $ $ $ G $ $
e
? o "j o o e o
~
m o j o o o w
e o
o o 2.
n_ 2 m s_.
g d s
!- * $ a * $ * $ * $ # E
- R h g $ $ : $ j $ $
o ? o o o o o o s o o
$ g $ g g x a O 6 g %
2 a m R E 0 - z o A o z 2 8 3 $ *
$ $ $ h 4 * $ $ o $ # 2 $ 2 $ $
"a 1
l 3 o "$ o o o * ? o o o . o I- o o 3 .
- d a n 3 E l e 2 N g R
~
$ # A 2 o R o o $ R o $ * $ 4 o o $ g o $ o $ t * * $ g o $ o @
0 = 2 o o hg, - 2 o - o o ? = s o o be$ *
- a a
aA ~* e 3 8
" $A
@3 g3 33 e s 8 4 * * $ 0 o $ $
6 S $ % $ $ W $ j $ $ g
- g ;
x" z o o 3 o g 3 o S o o o a o o g
2 g W a R 5 E =
@ A a 2 o $
h $ $ *
$ h j $ E * $ $ h j $. $ $
m
$
- 6 *$
- e ; o n - o o e a o $ e o o 9 -g t *
- M A 2 @ e ;
g d > $
$ 8 E
- * $ * $ $ g 3 * * $ R o $ e $ $ c* o *
$ 2 e $ o $
g 3 o o o g ? o o o o o
! 5 ? o a 3 g 2 $. : E- =
3 m
g
- 0 $ * $ $ g o o
$ R o
$ o $ = o = $ g o $ o $
o$u o o o " o o o e o o n E o o a l , -
m e o k
_ > m 8 e n 5
$ 1 $ 2 $ $ $ 5 o $ 3 o $ o $
g *-
o o o Q o o 6 o ~. o o o Q n 4 n n o g 3 o m 3 .
t l
l
- E $
- I h I E f $ $ 5 f $ k
- 3 f h e
= = n e = = : g e s e e s s e : e e g e s ; =, e s ;
l 1 - e s s - e s s - e h b d y b b 0 k N k
~
.; a3 k N N I
i I
z z l
a s - J a a , a 3
1 t t a i N N
)
- z z m a
~l>l' a t t s
a i
e s
g b b 2 z z a s j l t t g j i
> > a s , a e 1
A-4
1 i
M
- g A $
i I o, o y -
e 1 M M g ?. ~3 -
{
m +$ 1 n 3 m S, ?,
I g i l
l
- o' o
$ 3 o $ o @ R = o
$ g o g a g g o o $ c o g a g
= g o o o o o o j- = $ g = x o y o o
~ o o g o g o g g e o g g o g o g g o o g g o g o g m
~ ) o 6 o o o- a
~
o p n
o o o p o o o <
1 l
R o * $ 2 * $ $ g * * $ R * $ * $ 3 $ g * $ o f
_ g a ? o .
g a n o o : 6 o o
- . g p
- g R * * $ $ *
$ o *
$ R * $ *
$ = 2 o $ 2 * $
- o o ; o o $ o a o o
- a. o g te o ; o 3 o o g -
- y e - -
?
k R o o $ g o
1 o
$
- o o g c o o g M o
- 1 g o g o g o =
- g g -
g j = p o o 4 g ? o g o o s .
g -
^
bi c o o
@ g o g o @ N g a
- g ; o g o @ E D o o @ R- o g o g g i
- o ,- o o $ o g o $ o o 8 .
- Q o y o o s G -
g -
I -
E o 8 o
$ o @ 3 o E
- R * * $ R
" @ g $ $ gE @ $
$ g ? o o o g$
p ,-
- ? o a o o g ? o ? o o a *
$ se
- m 3 e .
3 O! w! l b c * $ ;- o 8 * $
$ $ 3 $ R * $ * $
j- g I
- - o ? o o f, g 2" o ? o o 5 g ? o 3 o o R 0 g e 3
% n
- o $ " o "
S @ o $ 2 o * $ A o $ * $
$ E $ $
o 0 o o o ? o m Q o . g e
o .
g o :a o a m
o 2 o
o o g
2 o o @ o g o
@ 3 o o @ R o $ o @ d
- o o
@ S o @ o @
o g g o o g ? o ? o o g 3 o o o
{"- "
m:
Q-5 0 * * * * $ o $ R o * $ 0 o $ * $
$ R o o 8 o
@ o @
g -.; o $ o o m 0 o m o o m a o =.
- o o
. o g o - R g o $ R * $ o @ : o o $ g o $ * $ g o * $ :: * $ o n
o .
- o 3 o o g 2 o a o o n o a o 2 o o
= = -
- ' ^
5 M A e M
- A e 5 2 2 e M M 5 0 3
- 3 e "s-!
- " p 0 s h, .I 2 3 ?. 3 3 @
- .- %. ?. - . 2 ? R 4
?, . - 3, ?, ? R $
- - - - _- , m . -
. e '
. e e I I *
- i n I I * # I i i I E ". # U i i 0 0 . > > c 0 C
} > > 0 0 *T
} > >
2 2 .
U $ ] 2 2 . U U f 2 2 . . U U f 5 4 > > 3 i e 5 5 5 > > 3 4 e 5 4 > > 3 5 e A-5
t 1 2 1) % 7 5 2 % 8 4
3 2
5 2
3 0 3 3 3 8 0 8 6 l 7 0 7 l
a 6 3 7 6
l a 7 5 2 4 a 3 t
0 2 7 6 1 to 0 5 5 5 o t to T
1 1 1( -
T 2 2 T 1
P 8 0 0 % 9 0 % 0 % 6 0 0 % 0 0 % 0 % 1 0 0 % 6 0 % 0 %
4 0 7 0 0 0 6 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 14, 0 7 0 1
0 0 0 0 1
0 0 3 0 0 0 3 2 0 3 3 1
16 8
9 1
1 1 %
I 1
1 6 1
1 0 0 % 0 0 % 0 % 2 0 0 % 4 0 % 0 % 9 0 0 % 4 0 % 0 %
1 0 3 0 0 2 0 4 0 0 4 0 7 0 0 6 2 3 3
0 1
0 0 2, 0 0 0 2 0 7 0 0 2 7 2 2 5 2 1 1 1 1 8 1 41 4 I
81 1 6 0 0 % 9 0 % 0 % 6 0 0 % 2 0 % 0 % 4 4
0 0 %
0 5
2 0 %
0 0 %
0 0 0 8 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 8 1 2 8 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 7 l 2 3 1
6 4 1 6 I 1 3 1 1 1
6 1 1 1 1 0 0 % 3 0 % 0 % 9 0 0 % 6 0 % 0 % 9 0 0 % 1 8
0 %
0 0 %
0 1 0 t 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 2 3 6 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 7 8 5 4 1 1 2 1 1 4 1 1 5 1 1 1 6 0 0 % 2 0 % 0 % 1 0 0 % 7 0 % 0 % 0 4
0 0 %
0 2
3 0 %
0 0 %
0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 9 0 0 0 0 2 3 5 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 9 3 6 9 6 1 3 8 0
0 1 3 0 1 3 1 0 1
1 1 F)
S I
C %
)
% 0 % 0 %
3 0 0 % 6 9
0 % 0 % 3 3
0 0 0
6 6
0 %
0 0 %
0 F
S 6
1 0 0 0
2 9 0 0 9 0 0 0 Y( 9 F 2 9 9 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 8 6 1
8 4 5 P 8 4 2 0 1 5
1 1
l 0 1 2 ( 0 1 9 S)
T 1 l C
1 Y
T D A J
( F L I
M E i C
E G A % % %
T 5 0 0 % 3 0 % 0 % A 4 0
0 0 % 3 0 % 0 % F 6 8
0 0 0
6 7
0 0
0 0
S 0 6 0 0 0 0 R0 8 0 3 0 0 E0 1 7 3 1 4 0 0 0 Y 2 7 0 0 0 O1 7 3 0
0 0 0 G4 7 3 8 S4 R5 0 1 6 8 9 T4 S5 0 1 1 1
A4 5 0 1 7 E04 0 R 0 I M4 O4 S 1 I R1 T1 N S A E T L R 0 0 0 % 8 0 % 0 % N 4 0 0 % 9 0 % 0 % E 4 0 0 % 0 0 % 0 %
T 8 0 3 0 0 [ 8 0 2 0 0 U 2 0
0 9 5
0 0 8 7 n 6 6 F 0 0 0 Y 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 6 I 6 0
6 1
1 8 F 0 4
1 6
9 E 0 4
1 5
6 7 T D r A
M V I
R R T P
% % N % % % % % %
4 0 0 % 8 0 0 E 8 8
0 0 5 0 0 7 5
0 0 0
6 6
0 0
0 0
5 0 5 0 0 C 8 0 1 0 0 5
4 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 5 6 4 5 3 2 5 3 1 0 1 6 0 1 8 0 1 5 4
0 0 0 % 7 0
0 % 0 % 1 3
0 0 % 7 2
0 % 0 % 2 2
0 0 %
0 9
7 0 %
0 0 %
0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 6 4
6 0 4 0 0 4 0 1
8 0 0 4 3 0 3 8
0 0 6 8 0 1 4 0 41 6 0 1 3 1
0 0 0 % 3 0
0 %
0 0 % 7 8
0 0 % % 0 % 0 % 7 9
0 0 %
0 7 0 %
0 0 %
0 6
0 8
0 6
0 5 0 0 9 5
7 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 -
0 1 0
2 3 0 6 4 0 1 3 1 5 2 ..
1 0
0 0 %
0 2
0 0 %
0 0 %
9 2
2 0 0 %
0 9
0 0 %
0 0
0
% 2 1
0 0 %
0 0
6 0 %
0 0 %
0 6
0 2 0 0 1
0 9 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 2 0 1 2 3 0 2 7 7 0 1 2 0 1 4 0 1 1 1 2 1) % 1 2 1) % 1 7 5 7 5 1 8 8 0 0 6
3 3
3 3 0 6
3 3 % 3 3
0 8 7
0 5
2 8 % 8 0 5
% 2 0 4 7
3 2
5 2 3
% 7 4 3 2 %
5 2
7 7 7 5 8 3
0 2 6 0 2 2 6 7 6 2 6 2 6 0 0 7, 0 1 7 7 6 3 3 0 3 1 1 1(
1
- 1 1 6 1( 1
- 2 2 1 4 2 2 1 I 4 1 5 5 5 1 5 3 5 5 l 1 l l
u u i l
u u t t s 5 m m te $.
r
%.r t t s
- te $.r
%. t t s m m te $. %.
s %. u u s %, - r s 5 u u r r M o o C e a a M o o $.
n e a a M o o %. C e a a E C C e c
e c C lp V V E C C e c
e c O lp V v E C C e c c C e lp v V d d n n Y Y m l u
l u T d d n n Y Y m lu t
u TI d d n n Y Y m l u tu II P P a a F l o I P P a a F F o P P a a F F o t t c
i r
a i
r a
t C m u
m u
t ir i
r a t C m u
m t i
r i
r t C m m s ts c t s c a t s c u t s c a a t s c u u E A v V E A % C C E A V V E A % C C E A V V E A % C C
_4A .j, Aem e a.- .E AehJM .E -.-4a#-,A-4 41.d.4.A4-4-ri 4A A* R4 AM - a #g 434-4-4.-----M1MdhAA5mi me -43.J-4 As. .IlJ 4 sAebwAas- M an 9 Am..EL M i4d..de.A-$.
l t- $ h $ $ 1 3 s 0 i i
)
o . o g o g l g s o
g o o g
=
t n o g o g u p o j = a
- 1
- g o E
$. s m
o o l.
2 o o 1 = o g o g o ? o y o e
- l c- $ $ $- $ $
y g a o o
. g k'
s e o o o g = o g o g
- g a ?
o a 8-
,3 $
o
- g o g a o z$ s s y 29 x
p.- ,
d m o o g e a g o g E.. o n o o a 8 o 5 g o o a e a g o g
= g e e g a s a
m o o a s o g o g a a R R *
- 1 * * $ o 1 g e o o 3
g * * $ 2 a g o g
~ s e a s s o -
t g j R e $ g
@ A $
s 2 0 i s ? ? O x
. e 1 5
- i i O U *d pf > >
Z Z jj 3 3 > > 3 i e t t A-7
, -