skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: WIPP Performance Assessment.

Abstract

Abstract not provided.

Authors:
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
Sandia National Lab. (SNL-NM), Albuquerque, NM (United States)
Sponsoring Org.:
USDOE National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)
OSTI Identifier:
1377742
Report Number(s):
SAND2016-8142PE
646798
DOE Contract Number:
AC04-94AL85000
Resource Type:
Conference
Resource Relation:
Conference: Proposed for presentation at the presented to DOE as part of the DOE Office of Project Management Oversight & Assessments Review of the WIPP Underground Ventilation System Project held August 24, 2016 in Carlsbad, NM.
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English

Citation Formats

Zeitler, Todd R. WIPP Performance Assessment.. United States: N. p., 2016. Web.
Zeitler, Todd R. WIPP Performance Assessment.. United States.
Zeitler, Todd R. 2016. "WIPP Performance Assessment.". United States. doi:. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1377742.
@article{osti_1377742,
title = {WIPP Performance Assessment.},
author = {Zeitler, Todd R.},
abstractNote = {Abstract not provided.},
doi = {},
journal = {},
number = ,
volume = ,
place = {United States},
year = 2016,
month = 8
}

Conference:
Other availability
Please see Document Availability for additional information on obtaining the full-text document. Library patrons may search WorldCat to identify libraries that hold this conference proceeding.

Save / Share:
  • No abstract prepared.
  • The groundwater flow pathway in the Culebra Dolomite aquifer at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) has been identified a potentially important pathway for radionuclide migration to the accessible environment. Consequently, uncertainties in the models used to describe flow and transport in the Culebra need to be addressed. A Geostatistics Test Problem'' is being developed to evaluate a number of inverse techniques that may be used for Dow calculations in the WIPP performance assessment (PA). The Test Problem is actually a series of test cases, each being developed as a highly complex synthetic data sct; the intent is for themore » ensemble of these data sets span the range of possible conceptual models of groundwater now at the WIPP site. This paper describes the results from Test Case No. 1. Of the five techniques compared, those based on the linearized form of the groundwater flow equation exhibited less bias and less spread in their GWTT distribution functions; the semi-analytical method had the least bias. While the results are not sufficient to make generalizations about which techniques may be better suited for the WIPP PA (only one test case has been exercised), analyses of the data from this test case provides some indication about the relative importance of other aspects of the flow modeling (besides inverse method or geostatistical approach) in PA. Then ancillary analyses examine the effect of gridding an the effect of boundary conditions on the groundwater travel time estimates.« less
  • Many lessons have been learned over the past 24 years as the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) project has progressed from initial site characterization to final licensing that may be of relevance to other nuclear-waste-disposal projects. These lessons pertain to the manner in which field and laboratory investigations are planned, how experiments are interpreted, how conceptual and numerical models are developed and simplified~ and how defensibility and credibility are achieved and maintained. These lessons include 1) Site characterization and performance assessment (PA) should evolve together through an iterative process, with neither activity completely dominating the other. 2) Defensibility and credibilitymore » require a much greater depth of understanding than can be represented in PA models. 3) Experimentalists should be directly involved in model and parameter abstraction and simplification for PA. 4) External expert review should be incorporated at all stages of a project~ not just after an experiment or modeling activity is completed. 5) Key individuals should be retained for the life of a project or a process must be established to transfer their working knowledge to new individuals. 6) An effective QA program needs to be stable and consistent for the duration of a project and rests on best scientific practices. All of these lessons relate to the key point that consideration must be given from the earliest planning stages to maximizing the defensibility and credibility of all work.« less
  • The Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) is being developed by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) for the geologic (deep underground) disposal of transuranic (TRU) waste. A Compliance Certification Application (CCA) of the WIPP for such disposal was submitted to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in October 1996, and was approved by EPA in May 1998. In June 1998, two separate, but related, lawsuits were filed, one against DOE and one against EPA. On March 22, 1999, the court ruled in favor of DOE, and on March 26, 1999, DOE formally began disposal operations at the WIPP for non-mixedmore » (non-hazardous) TRU waste. Before the WIPP can begin receiving mixed (hazardous) TRU waste, a permit from the State of New Mexico for hazardous waste disposal needs to be issued. It is anticipated that the State of New Mexico will issue a hazardous waste permit by November 1999. It is further anticipated that the EPA lawsuit will be resolved by July 1999. Congress (Public Law 102-579, Section 8(f)) requires the WIPP project to be recertified by the EPA at least as frequently as once every five years from the first receipt of TRU waste at the WIPP site. As part of the DOE's WIPP project recertification strategy, Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) has used systems analysis and performance assessment to prioritize its scientific and engineering research activities. Two 1998 analyses, the near-field systems analysis and the annual sensitivity analysis, are discussed here. Independently, the two analyses arrived at similar conclusions regarding important scientific activities associated with the WIPP. The use of these techniques for the recent funding allocations at SNL's WIPP project had several beneficial effects. It increased the level of acceptance among project scientists that management had fairly and credibly compared alternatives when making prioritization decisions. It improved the ability of SNL and its project sponsor, the Carlsbad Area Office of the DOE, to demonstrate the importance of ongoing scientific and engineering activities associated with the WIPP project. Finally, it provided objective documentation of the decision-making process for issues with an impact on safety at the WIPP, a critical topic for the general public and the regulatory agencies.« less
  • After some 20 years of site-specific studies in the United States of America (USA), the US Department of Energy (DOE) Carlsbad Area Office (CAO) is on schedule to open a deep geological repository for the safe disposal of transuranic (TRU) waste at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) in April 1998. A focused organization, well-defined mission, early and iterative interactions with the regulators, oversight groups, and stakeholders in the regulatory process, and strong local support are some of the keys to this progress. The remaining activities, which will be completed prior to the initiation of disposal at the WIPP, includemore » a formal integrated system checkout, readiness review and evaluation, and the required regulatory approvals. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has now defined the path forward for the WIPP with respect to one of the major regulatory hurdles. With the promulgation of Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 194, in February 1996 entitled {open_quotes}Criteria for the Certification and Re-Certification of the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant`s Compliance with the 40 CFR Part 191 Disposal Regulations,{close_quotes} the format and content for the DOE`s Compliance Certification Application (CCA) is now clearly defined. Along with the much needed definition of the required format and content for the CCA, the final criteria included a few unforeseen challenges for the DOE. Among these challenges are new requirements that jeopardize the timely completion of the performance assessment (PA) calculations and submittal of the CCA to the EPA in October 1996.« less