minutes of the september 12. 1996 u.s. nuclear regulatory ... · * thermal test facility access...

- -

MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 12. 1996U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION/U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

TECHNICAL MEETING ON THE EXPLORATORY STUDIES FACILITY

On September 12, 1996, staff from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission metwith staff from the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) to discuss items of mutualinterest regarding progress at DOE's Exploratory Studies Facility (ESF) atYucca Mountain and technical issues related to repository design. The itemsdiscussed included the ESF construction status including the status of mappingthe high-density fracture zone at the second bend of the ESF, the ESF testingstatus and the results of the recent ESF Appendix 7 visit, the description andstatus of the Engineering Design Program, and an overview of the DOE report onpredicting the effective thermal conductivity of spent nuclear fuel. Themeeting was held by three-way videoconference at DOE offices in Washington.1.C.: DOE offices in Las Vegas. Nevada: and Center for Nuclear WasteRegulatory Analyses (CNWRA) offices in San Antonio. Texas. The meeting wasanother of the continuing series of periodic ESF technical meetings.

Attachment 1, the meeting agenda, was included with the meeting announcementand also made available at the meeting.

Organizations other than NRC and DOE that were represented at the meeting werethe CNWRA; DOE's Management and Operating Contractor (M&O). U.S. GeologicalSociety (USGS), U.S. Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board (NWTRB), State ofNevada's Nuclear Waste Project Office (NWPO) and Nuclear Waste Task Force(NWTF). Nye County, and Weston. Attachment 2 is a list of those who were atthe meeting.

The first presentation was made by DOE. It provided an update of the statusof the ESF construction and of the tunnel mapping as well as a discussion ofthe high-density fracture zone at the second bend in the ESF. Thepresentation also addressed the excavation method for the In situ thermaltests and the fracture zone effects on drift design. Attachment 3 providesthe handouts/overheads that were used during this presentation. The tunnelboring machine (TBM) was reported to be about 150 meters short of the end ofthe second bend in the ESF. ESF mapping was reported to be complete up toabout 150 meters behind the TBM. Tunnelling was reported to be on hold" atthe time of the meeting in order to improve the ventilation in the tunnel andre-indoctrinate tunnel workers regarding safety of tunnel operations.Controlled drill and blast excavation was being used in the thermal testalcove with plans to use the alpine miner when repairs to it have beencompleted.

DOE then presented an overview of ESF testing activities and thermal testingissues. Attachment 4 includes the handouts/overheads that were used duringthis part of the meeting. The status of each ESF alcove, its test status, and

961105027 961029PDR WASTE PDR'

.

preliminary test results were given. including the status of Alcove 5. thealcove for the in situ thermal tests. These tests include a single heatertest - started in August 1996 - and a drift scale test - scheduled to start inSeptember 1997. DOE addressed the thermal test concerns that had been raisedpreviously by the NRC in the Appendix 7 meeting held on July 24. 1996. CNWRAsuggested that DOE consider using alternative thermal inputs in the driftscale heater test and agreed to supply additional information in this regardto DOE. Attachment 5 is a copy of what the CNWRA provided to DOE forconsideration. The information provided by DOE at this meeting is helpful tothe NRC staff in understanding the thermal test program at Yucca Mountain.Additional information is expected to be found in the DOE test design reportwhen it becomes available. Other topics that were addressed during thispresentation included chlorine-36 data and their implications, rock massquality for the main drift portion of the ESF, orientation of fractures withinthe ESF. surface based testing status. and the status of key fiscal year 1996deliverables. Continued progress was made toward NRC staff resolution of theissue of adequacy of fracture/fault data for licensing.

The M&O then described its engineering design system. Attachment 6 includesthe handouts/overheads that were used during this part of the meeting. TheM&O plans to use the current design process and controls through final design.That is, there will be a single pass design developed to support DOE'sviability assessment; then an environmental impact statement; then the licenseapplication. (The single pass design does not support construction.) Plansinclude prioritization provided by binning the level of design detail requiredat each of the noted points in the process. NRC has not providedrecommendations regarding DOE's proposed binning system. waiting, rather, tosee the system activated. DOE plans to have the design drawings and documentssummarized to the level of detail adequate for the viability assessment. andthe design details will be described at thetime of license application.Detailed construction drawings and specifications will be available on aschedule commensurate with the construction schedule.

The final presentation by DOE addressed a proposed methodology for determiningthe effective thermal conductivity of spent nuclear fuel. The presentationwas made to start a dialog with NRC regarding the methodology. Attachment 7includes the handouts/overheads that were used during this part of themeeting. DOE has concluded that the new methodology uses a simple calculationprocess to provide a "best estimate" of fuel element peak cladding temperatureand that benchmark results agree with reported results from spent nuclear fuelstorage cask testing. The methodology was developed using a two-dimensionalANSYS model.

- 2 -

At the close of the meeting. comments were made by the representatives of NyeCounty and the State of Nevada. The Nye County representative expressedconcern regarding the use of respirators by workers in the ESF and suggestedthat it would be preferred that an engineering "fix" could be found to solvethe problem of excessive dust without the use of additional water. Therepresentative from the State of Nevada requested that NRC management considerthe sufficiency of DOE's latest commitments on the level of detail in thereference design for its viability assessment and how the viability assessmentfits into the license application.

The meeting concluded at about 4:00 p.m. EDT. The next meeting in the seriesis scheduled for December 16, 1996.

hn G. Sraul<ivision of Waste ManagementOffice of Nuclear Material

Safety and SafeguardsU.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Christian E. Einberg Regulatory Coordination Di iOffice of Civilian Radioactive

Waste ManagementU.S. Department of Energy

- 3 -

NRCIDOE VIDEO CONFERENCE AGENDAEXPLORATORY STUDIES FACILITY

3E-077 Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC

Atrium Room, Summerlin, 1551 Hillshire Drive, Las Vegas, NV

Building 189 Video Conference Center, CNWRA, San Antonio, TX

September 12. 1996

12:30 EST .(9:30 PST)

12:40 EST(9:40 PST)

1:30 EST(10:30 PST)

2:30 EST1 1:30 PST)

2:45 EST1 1:45 PST)

Opening Remarks ................ DOE,NRC,NV,AULG

ESF Construction Update wstatus of mapping of the high-density fracture zone ............... DOE

(Include planned excavation method for thermal tests)(Include fracture zone effects on drift design)

ESF Testing Update w/Appendix 7 follow-up .... ...... DOE(Include elevated temperature of planned

drift-scale thermal tests)(Include fracture zone effects on heat distribution

and modeling groundwater/reflux flow)

Break

Description and Status of Engineering Design Program . . . DOE(Include design process control)

3:00 EST(12:00 PST)

3:45 EST(12:45 PST)

4:00 EST(1:10 PST)

Overview - SNF Effective Thermal Conductivity .......(Include predicting thermal effects on

waste package and EBS)

DOE

Closing Remarks and Discussion ....... DOE, NRC, NV, AULG

Adjourn (Next meeting scheduled for 12/16/96)

ATTACIMENT 1

. -

DOE/NRC SF TECHNICAL MEETING

SEPTEMBER 12, 1996

ATTENDANCE LIST

NAME ORGANIZATION PHONE

- DOE, Las Vegas, Nevada -

Hawe, Tim DOE (702) 794-1441

Haghi, Ali M&O (702) 295-4873

Harrington, Paul DOE (702) 794-5415

Tynan, Mark C. DOE (702) 794-5457

Bailey, Jack M&O (702) 794-7266

Skipper, Ken DOE (702) 794-1438

Frishman, Steve NV NWPO (702) 687-3744

Bahney, Robert H. III M&O (702) 794-5337

Segrest, Alden M&O (702) 794-1924

Gil, April DOE (702) 794-5578

Treichel, Judy NWTF (702) 248-1127

VanDerPuy, Mark DOE (702) 794-5563

Geer, Tom M&O (702) 295-5567

Doering, Thomas W. M&O (702) 794-1857

Glenn, Chad NRC (702) 388-6125

Hastings, Peter M&O (702) 794-1946

Belke, Bill NRC (702) 388-6125

Murphy, Mal Nye County, NV (360) 943-5610

- DOE, Washington, D.C. -

Einberg, Chris DOE (202) 586-8869

Dresser, Dan Weston (202) 646-6781

Wallace, Ray USGS (202) 586-1244

Murthy, Ram B. DOE (202) 586-1239

Spraul, Jack NRC (301) 415-6715

Hogsett, Steve NRC (301) 415-8537

ATTACHMENT 2

K]1, I

Pohle, Jeffrey NRC (301) 415-6703

Jagannath, Banad NRC (301) 415-6653

McFarland, Russ NWTRB (703) 235-4473

Fenster, Dave M&O (301) 488-6327

Rusell, John L. CNWRA (301) 881-0289

Nataraja, Mysore NRC (301) 415-6695

Chang, Kien NRC (301) 415-6612

Justus, Phil NRC (301) 415-6745

- CNWRA, San Antonio, Texas -

Cragnolino, Gustavo CNWRA (210) 522-5539

Manaktala, Hersh CNWRA (210) 522-5210

Chowdhury, Asad CNWRA (210) 522-5151

Green, Ron CNWRA (210) 522-5305

Hsiung, Simon CNWRA (210) 522-5209

McKague, Larry CNWRA (210) 522-5183

Rice, George CNWRA (210) 522-2293

{2u'1ofo~t d1W1/0/POOI�

*

U.S. Department of EnergyOffice of Civilian Radioactive Waste

Management

Exploratory Studies Facility

PRESENTED TONRC

PRESENTED BYPaul G. Harrington, Team LeaderAMEFO Planning & Procedures

(u.

I September 12, 1996

ESF Tunneling Operations Update* Completed ESF main drift excavation July 2,

1996, Sta 59 + 01

* TBM was at Station 63 + 47 on Sept. 9, 1996

* Thermal test facility access observation drift(Alcove #5) was completed on June 14,1996

* North Ghost Dance fault access (Alcove #6)was at Station 0 + 89 on Sept, 9, 1996

* Forecast "Hole-Out" - March 1997

* Excavation activities suspended bymanagement directive

nrc.ppt

ALCOVE EXCAVATION SEQUENCING

MIN TUNNEL

YNCIN IS ~h4 FORhIuPRSES ONLY ANID IS SUUJEtl110CHANGE AS RSQU RED IV

ITNESE SKCETCHES ARE NOT OA'jN10SCLE

SOUTH GHOST lAcE l:AhULT ALCOVE NORTH GHOST LANCE FAULT ALCOVE

SCHEDULED COMPLETION 10 JAN 97 SCHEDULED COMPLETION - 24 FEB 97MILESTONE COMPLETION 1 JAN 97 MILESTONE COIPLElION - 03 MAR 97

HEATER TSt ALCOVE *I

SCHEDULED COIPLETION - 24 FEB 97MILESTONE COMPLETION - 24 JAN 97

ALPINE MINER

DRILL IBAST

COMPLETED EXCAVATION UP DATED 0645

TUNNEL BORING MACHINE PROGRESSNorth Portal

Starting DateSeptember 20, 1994 South Portal

00+60

Compglex A #v-; Akove

12", 441 4

Faut

Performance Measurement Revised 6-13-96

METERS FEET

Total Scheduled Progress In 6195.5 20,326.2

Total Actual Progress in6347.1 20.823.6

Data Posted on o f9

78+57

miles

F 1240- 8/21195

Actual

6.14 47 1ng--0 9i

Adepal 1

4 _ SSoulhen Ghost Dance Fault

- - _

Nothern GhostDance Fautt

Akove86 60+00

6,000 meters1 9,685 feet3.7 miles_ _ -

50+00_

L ESO85M159+017-2-96

| z --:-i Scheduled25+00

N - Actual

Ditawing Not To Scale TBMPGREV.126.CDR/8.20-96

Repository Design - Lessons LearnedESF representative of full range ofpotential repository conditions

* Machine Design- Cutters

- Muck pick-upShield configuration

- Gripper configurationVentilation

* Fracture density and orientation

* Ground Supportnrc ppt

11-5

I

VEW OF PHOTOGANTRY IN 2ND CURVE FROn REAROTN

VIWOF THERNOMECHANICAL DRIFT FRON ALCOVE 5 EXTENSION)

II

itI

I

iit

i

0) 0

YUCCAMOUNTAIN

PROJECT

Scientific Program Update: OvTesting Activities and Thermal

erview ofTesting I';sues

Presented to:DOE/NRC Technical Meeting, Video Conference

Presented by:Mark C. TynanDOE Staff, Assistant Manager Scientific Programs

03

IhSeptember 12, 1996 U.S. Department of EnergyOffice of Civilian Radioactive

Waste Management

7sw,

n e I o r i n g M E IC hi

t a b 1 9 4 P g e S 8SO° POltaP

70+

G o tD n c P S k - ts*-

--- O--

-h--4

!~~~*ooC st

…-

B~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I

Sche ~ -

Coalede

D r S 4in A c tu a ,125f, 19 No O -

l

N

DOE / NRC TECHNICAL MEETING

ESF MAPPING STATUSTBM at Station 63+47

Full Periphery Mapping completed to Sta. 62+48- In Topopah Spring crystal-poor middle non-lithophysal (Tptpmn) to 63+47

Detailed Line Survey completed to Sta. 62+50

Stereophotography completed to Sta. 62+71

RQD Classification completed to Sta: 62+27

Q&RMR completed to Sta 62+00?

3

DOE I NRC TECHNICAL MEETING

Status Alcove Studies:

Alcove # mapping photographyline survey &

I complete complete2 complete complete3 complete complete4 complete complete5 complete complete

- to 130 m In at end of access I observation drift

6 not initiated not initiated- will begin mapping In next few weeks; 90m in

q -


ESF Mapping product content- locations of structural features, samples, ground support,

convergence pins, closure pins, MPBX, SPBX and straingages are recorded on ESF maps; ground conditions

Consolidated Sampling- samples collected as required by LANLITCO Construction

Monitoring:- continued to read convergence pins, including alcoves

2,3,4,5Construction Activities

- Thermal Alcove (5): borehole drilling continues inAccesslObservation Drift I single heater test area;excavation has temporarily ceased at about 130m from main drift,concluding early construction phase

- Northern Ghost Dance Fault Alcove (6) constructioncompleted fro Phase I to 90m; preparation for drillingthermal corehole through Ghost Dance Fault

Figure 3. Q Values for Topopah Spring Middle Nonilthophysal Zone (Tptpmn)(Main Drift Station 27+16 to 44+30 m). S tinnal I aboratonie

WBS 1.2.3.2.7.3.4QA QA

Tptpmn - Topopah Spnag Tuff, Middle Nonlithophysal Zone1000

100

3CY

U

0

CA

to

0.1

0.

C),

~00Ut

aZ

0.01

0.001

i i----i

- i +-

Legend

* Rated Q

Moving Average Q

+ Installed Support

V

I I I- I � + � I -, 4 � 4 -� 4 � I � 4 � 4.I I -

I 11119111111111111 I111111111

2600 3000

I """'1"""'11""1""

100 3800 4200

Funnel Stationing in Meters4600 5000

6.

Figure 1. Q Values from Thermal Testing Facility (TTF) Surrounding the Single Element Heater Test.Sandia National LaboratoresWBS 1.2.3.2.7.3.4QA OA

1000

100

._

0au1

ao

10 -

0.1 -

0

ca

gD

04

0

0.01

0.001

. = _ _- X __ I _

Lcgend

* Rated Q

+ Installed Suppo rt

V

_ , .,

1

_ j i i ~ i I I I I I

250 I.0 2550 75 0 25-

Tunnel Stationing in Meters50

Station (30 to 58+75 m) versus Rated Q and Q Nbving Average in the Main Drift.Stratigaphy Sandia National Laboratones

Iudwft gw _Prlininary

1000 -_

100 -

-

I - 9

L=]: _ , ____ -

_ e t e f _ - L- - I f I I e I I :

. g ,:*.- * :,*. .. -i ......... - -- -.---- W-,

! -L;-@ b *-bL--- * >- *L--

m 1 *w#-w - 3 21''' 1 iililLi ::1E M;z: X ;L[;It8:SoI .-- :'.YSrl , * Sots 1

1.s - C - U W W ffi H

I

.0

10

I

II

Os@1

-* wE- * .- 'V. ̂4rL. f 4ll- 4- inI p

t

420Nl:l'A"jW4%+R.i. ...... Iv

IS OW yz I.ORC'tw e, "~~~~~~~~~V .".,,.r.-,,~,p,~,~",17 t"'_1,t~. "P g �-�ppnw H._g_1 � n�vp..-%,-

,.7 , . q,1.y ZA'7 01 _0.1 ,: -f ±-v lIV_ -b -.x-, - __I__ __ L ...-. ' -'- . -; |

.. L. I r M..Trt; Tu

-- -~-----~ 9-4

4. Tpbt4 & Toy - PreI - _

iva i*�nB-'e-dded_ -fik- -armI Yucca0.G1

0.001

[Mtn. T.

F :m

9 i Raild Q

Mo ilug Avac gcQ

+ limfladSuppn -I

v

. IP1 rn -. I . 1 ML. -UV~W1-Q T._ -Ia _A- T _nn.t: n 1 .J :4 L-nh-J 7nP.

I 1 ± L n 14p..JI * «l - *IJ I

9. Tpinm - Topopal SprifgTuff, kliddle lnonlittolhysal 4one - I - I __ I __ I- -. . ............III I IIIIII 1!1 11 III III III III IIIII I IIIII I II i II III III I11111 lIlIlIl� Ill Iii 11111111 �II 1111111111111

3000 3400 3800 4200 4600 5000 5400 . 5800Tunnel Stationing in Meters

I? -

Station (00+60 o 30+00 m) versus Rated Q and Q Mbving Average in the Win Drift

Stratigraphy Sa ndia National LaboratoiesPreliminary

1000

100

T3- - l- 41 5 16 7-8 9

_ I, _l | ,, = _ , _ _~~~~~~~~~~~~I

-

uD

.P£i

10

I

0.1 --

I t

I. -- It

. Ia - - ......" - - - - - .V

:_ .*t k

I 1 m

a

V

I

III

k .rV

0fi~

I "I - a ,. me- **k

dfF. V

-J

_ i !4

-_0 _ o

0

C,)

_.

ILo t.4

A

IV

iT.. Dipj IJ I UIL3 Tnl A - flfT"Y'

0.01

0.001

4. Tp &Ty- TiVa C yon dded uff a Yucca Mtn. TA

IGTnh2- nPa%4 d iZ Ie__ _I _ I _ , 7bof Si T l _1 7 Mp~ swiU Ir Zmyiinraan ~s oe

Legend

* RatedQ

Moving Avemge Q

+ h ed Spot

V

9. Tp pmn - opopa spd"mTuff 4ddlel ,nlifthhysal 4one I I I I11111 ri iIllil 11111 I Ij Il~l~llll 1111117111111lI 1171111111J 1111T 11111111 111111111111 I I IT7111111,1 I I I ~lIIII~rl I

0 400 800 1200 1600 2000Tunnel Stationing in Meters

2400 2800

C?

28+00 - 56+30 Fractures in the ESFFracture Density and Moving Average

Tptpmn14 .

12

10

8 10

A.

.0

4

2

0- - I ~- . . . .. . I a u I V- U t r -v- - -

co M- -81 8 8 M M § 1 I 8 I § ISg. (moto8 8 8 Statoning (mted)I L II E

U. S. Geological Survey/Bureau of Reclamation2.)*~~ ~~ ~~ ~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~

NWTRB Meeting, July 9-10. 199610

VV,

TpkfTpbt5/Tpc 0+60 - 28+00 Fractures in the ESFFracture Density and Moving Average

Tpcpv - Tptrv Tptm Tptrl-Tptpul14

12

10

8

4

2

0

- - - . . . I ' l l8W. § (81 & § § 181. § § § 8V- § 9 & § (80 SOO 1 8V- 8 1 1 § § R -§V- V- V- V- T- T- T- V- T- V-N �3 C4 C4 C4 N

Stationing (meters)U. S. Geological Survey/Bureau of Reclamation NWrRB Meeting, July 910, 1996 I I

.... . .

2U49 to 399 rDLs otuirs Contour Plot

SCHMIDT POLECONCNtRATI ONSX of total pr

1. X La

(4 x

< 19 x

< 12 x

w ~~~~~ ~~~~~~~( 4 xEQUAL AREA

LI4R. HEMISPHERE

2563 PolesHO BIAS

CORRECT ION

Poles to Planes

29499 to 33409 DLS Fwaotuz~s Scatter Plot

MUM. OF POLES

4o4*4 +*4 +eaeau I pole

\ *n ..++ .+ .+ + 4 to 7

so + + t0+4 +000 + go+eevo*4 4 4+ 4c *4.44*000 0 to 11

4*0 + +29**to *23

+ee+ e + +40 +0+0004 0 + 12 to 13*4 + +4 + + ++++ e0000e+**+ + gk e +*+eO*0/° t+e + +0+0 * 0 e 16 to 19

000+ + *+~~44 00 * 2 o3

4 e ++ + ++ + e 4* + + 4 + + *440 L3.ZR 20 to 23{oe+ +e++ + + +eeoe

* 4 4 4*+ 46 4 *4 *400

*r++ 4 4+ 4 04 44 ++ oe++00 0 24 to 27

40040 44* * 00+00

a + + o0+ * * +*4eo*0+ ++++ 00**0 44*4+**I * 28 to 31

w q +e~°t + ++ + eoe F *E o32 to 35

4000*4 44*440440 00~~40 000

I e ++e + +++ + + o P_\eove+ ++ + +o e + +++ ++ oez EQUAL AREA

e + + o+e + +t + +e00 o+ * +" 0: eL eetUR. HEMISPHERE

1 * ++ ++e ++ee e }+ + *++eed\ ++ + + e+ + +0

*+ e + o ++ + ooo

0 4 + e ~+ + + + +~$ + + .. 00*+ v+ + *+ e0

Oee+ ++e ++* + ++o*/>eoe-ee~eo + e++ +eex

boveevooe- ++ee + o

Po l s to P anes

.

35+99 to 42+99 DLS Firac tues Contour Plot-M i - - -- -

151 | SCHMIDT POLECONCENRAT I ONSv. of total per

.8 x area

( 2 K

( 4 V.

( 6

w -E (B VEQUAL AREA

LI4R. HEMISPHERE

2208 Poles

CORRECTI ON

Poles to Planes- .

35.92 to 42+99 DLS Fractures Contour Plot.

yo o ++* , FOOOO0^-/ 0+ ++ 0+00000>1+

>,to ++ + 0 o ooo-eo* s+ o+- ew + o+* **os

t Jo+ _ + ++o ooo Kw*+o + n ++ + +++0000o

o + + + _ oooooo

so+0+ + _ + ++ 0ovoxo~~+oo+ + a + + + o0

*ie+ ++ + (a ++e0eo+_ + o + + + 0+oo^

{ ° ° + + + 0 + +ofe + + + 0+*+Oe

s+ +o + : + +

Z2 + + " + ++ + o + *++ ++ 4i +000 + o0 7

S,~~~! + $*01D o o + + *++ + o+ o +

o + eo + + + 001o+ + o e+ eo + eo

\ + ~ +~v ++ + +e0oo

\+ + F O + O+ 000* s+ + o + + + +oooo0

*+ +~~~~ ++ +otoecO0oo+ + oo* + ooo

*+ +X + +oo**o+++o +oorb+ + + + 0 + oo{>+0 0 ++ + + ++oo

> ++ o + ++ + +ooo~oooovo+ + I + +00ow

ooooe~+ + o+ + v o>+ooo~ove ee e+ 0 o ' ovoo~olooeooot

HUM. OF POLES

+ I pole

o 4 to

O 8 to

o 12 to

* 16 to 2

* 29 to Z

* 24 to;

* 28 to

* 32 to'

* 36 to@

7

Ll

L5

L9

23

31

35

39

EQUAL AREA

LWR. HEMISPHERE

2208 Poles

s -Fo * * 2 -

4260 to 490 DLS F"otuzs Contour Plot

SCHMIDT POLECONCENTRATIONSx of total per

0.3 :4 aw~a

6

< 12

w --E (14EQUAL AREA

LUR. HEMISPHERE

3159 PolesNO BIAS

CORRECT ION

Poles to Planes

420 t 49*90 DLS Fraotures Scatter Plot

NU. OF POLES

* I pole

00,,00* oo *0**0 0 " ° 10 to 19

*S °, * ;*000 20 to 29

oo+ 4 *ooooo o 39 to 39

* 49 to 49

+~o+ + <1f$ e +ot @*50 to 59

+i~l $ s °+o¢+ooe o , 60 to 69

: _ + + 70 to 79

* 0 to 99

EQUAL AREA

L\ER. HEMISPHERE

3159 Poles00400 *0.0 . *0* 00

'0+ +1+ tt ::+0* on°°t4o000000

Poles to Plans

, .

z--

- --. -

49.90 to 56+31 DLS Fractures contour Plot

a ~~~~~~~SCHMIDT POLECONCEITRAT IONSX of total pp

I ~~~~9.2 aa

< 2.5 x

<(5 x

< 7.5 K

< 12.! K

< 15 Y.

w (E 17.5 V.EQUAL AREA

INN * HEMI SPHERE

2208 PolesNO Bs

CORRECT ION

Poles to PlanesIL

49+99 to 56+31 DLS Factures scatter PLQtib

HU". OF POLES

+ 1 pole

e 9 to 17

o le to 26

* 27 to 35

* 36 to 44

x 45 to 53

v 54 to 62

4* 63 to 71

* 72 to US

* el to e9

EQUAL AREA

INR. HEMISPHERE

2208 Poles

WI

Poles to Planes


EXPLORATORY STUDIES FACILITYActivities and observations

Drilling blast monitoring holes in the AOD near thecross drift

,/4 V


EXPLORATORY STUDIES FACILITYActivities and observations

- Ghost Dance Fault splay identified in NIS Main driftat station 57+02; 12m offset, strike 2050, dip issteep, with fracture zone on downthrown side

- Fracture zones with north/south to NEISWorientation from 58+00 to current position; priorfracture orientations more NW/SE in 35+00 to 55+00portion of the tunnel

11


ESF ALCOVES: testing status and preliminaryresults

-Alcove I - Upper Tiva Canyon Alcove (UTCA)} Station 0+42.5a gas analysis, age are 100% modern

V

1.


ESF ALCOVES: testing status and preliminaryresults-Alcove 2 - Bow Ridge Fault Alcove ( BRFA),

* Station 1+68

tests Tiva lower lithophysal, Bow Ridge Fault, pre-Rainier Mesa non-welded tuffsgas phase % carbon, C12113 ratio, 0181/16 ratio andC14 data should be availablegas age interpreted to be modern to 1000yrs oldno attenuation of barometric pressure changes inBRF zonetemperature measurements in boreholesCross hole tests and tracer tests indicate high airpermeabilities and porosities in fault zone (20 darcies,20-29% porosity); 5-27 darcies perm. for rock units tested

ESF Alcove 2Bow Ridge Fault Test; two radial boreholes ~30m deepr r ifs 95¢ vg~se~sai>W< >g~kg^¢*S-4s; so i....", -- S I...I . --. - ...

V~ti. ~~ e


ESF ALCOVES: testing status and preliminaryresults-Alcove 3 - Upper PTn Contact Alcove (UPCA)

* Station 7+56; Tiva lower non-lithophysal I vitric contact

> gas phase % carbon, C12113 ratio, 018/16 ratio andC14 data should be available

a gas age interpreted to be modern to 2000 yrs old> tritium detected in borehole 4 (4 samples); none

detected in borehole 1 (1 sample), bomb pulse H20> Air permeability measurements, Tiva lower

nonlithophysal, 0.04 to 8 darcies; Tiva lower vitriczone, 1-24 darcies. Measurements reflect variation in intervalfracture density variation

> Shut-in pressure monitoring, gas chemistry sampling, C14, tritiumanalyses being performed; no further results to report today

ESF Alcove 3: Upper Paintbrush- Tuff Non-Welded ContactTest of Lower Tiva hydrostratigraphic unit; two radial

boreholes 30m deep each~~~~~~~~~~~ fl I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Z

"a~~~SPl...Ž4 ............ .

OW~~~~~~ I, ,

TI 151 BROM~~~~~- I*'

MEN por~rl~oo ~.

~~~"--~~~~~~~~ A~~~AL PP O IM T

w~~~~~~~~~2.nctnncr-949

v



-Alcove 4 - Lower PTn hydrostratigraphic contactalcove (LPCA)

> Station 10+27> Pre Pah Canyon Tuffs (PTn), Topopah vitric (TSwl)> no test results available

Test of PTn h)bI

ESF Alcove 4(drostratigraphic unit; one radialorehole 30m deep

\ / Office/Refuge

-ICri ApRniAT

B...''~

~~* Zag

~NRG- g ,~0 ~

~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ o ot Potl--

SALE APPROXIMATE

125.nrc.tynan.cdr - 9/4/96

V



-Alcove 5 - Thermal Test Facility I Alcove:a Station 28+27o Topopah middle non-lithophysal tested in thermal

alcove; 0.001 to 10+ darcies bulk rock permeabilitiesrecorded

*> Single Heater Test initiated 8126196; heater testcontinues

a>. construction monitoring activities continuea Drilling continues in thermal test facility; most

borehole drilling to be completed within 1-2 weeks

ESF Alcove 5Thermal Testing - Phase I

IConstructron .0-S:-.Turnaround*-lw>>2..v. .X;uNIche;XX>;g.6P>--

.,:,,'o'^ ^ . s tE . I

�o - ' o >.. .?

t E ) n S

' . .

\,. i,

125.nrc.tynan.cdr -9/U96

Plate-LoadingNiche

Drift ScaleTest Region

HeatedDrift

Began: Jan. 19, '96

Connecting Drift

Drift

ThermomechanicalAlcove Extension

ThermomechanicalAlcove

IoRmCenterline @ CS 28+27 ESF Main Drift a

I9I

Figure 1-1. Plan View of ESF Thermal Test Facility.

21

Thermal Test Facility Layout

Floor HeatersBulkhead

\ if \\ \~Plate-oading 7 ell DAS

Instrument Holesfrom Observation Drift

Test

a


Summary Single Heater Test Activity- Purpose: to study and characterize host rock

environment heat transfer, conduction, convection,moisture movement, thermally induced geochemicalchanges in water and rock chemistries and properties,and thermallmechanical properties; examine performanceof tunnel support systems

- Start of test on 8126195; 9-12 month test duration- About 25 cu meters rock to be heated to IOOOC by single

heater element in thermal test alcove- Heater element may reach temperatures of 3500C- Proximal to heater element, 2000C + for wall rock- Cooling phase, summer '97; test to be completed during

the fall of '97

I7)


Characteristics of Drift Scale Test- Will be initiated in FY97 and continue for 24 years- 30,000cu ft of rock will be heated to OOOC; heater-

proximal wall rock temperatures may be 200OC-350 0C- heater element temperature may be 2 times higher than

temperature in wall rock (up to 4000C)- NOTE:

o Test development and model assumption is thatconduction is most important; thus, models reflectconduction only. If convection is involved oraccommodated by model, temperatures within host rockwould drop. Therefore, models of temperature / profileswithin host unit are conservative.Hot source (4000C) required to heat rock; area of thermalperturbation will be monitored, has been modeled, andeffects of induced thermal pulse on rock bulk hydrologicand physical properties will be measurable



-Alcove 6 - N. Ghost Dance Fault Alcove (NGDFA)a Station 37+37a Test Topopah Tuffs, GDF zone

* Phase 1: thermal probe hole; constructioncomplete, drilling to begin in mid-September

* Phase 2: hydrologic and hydrochemical tests,maps, construction monitoring along GDF

* No tests conducted to report on yet

ESF Alcove 6Ghost Dance Fault test alcove: Phase I

-C �. : � � �e - - -M - -, ., - - - .." - -

ESF Acove 6Ghost Dance Fault test alcove: Phase 1

4 -- 4¾'i:

d. b p '~4. - ~ ..4-l 4 thru >'"'#34 4.444

ESF~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 4 4 -Cy 4 U.4,444

4-.4-'..4 4444 4- -

- -r-'-t- -~~'s~"-~- .4 4

.Jim. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~¶4 44 444~

$44-.44444 4 4..44

e ogGhs a ~ut rcmap In-

44~',4 . 4 4 4 4

.44., ~ 4or 4ge


SURFACE BASED TESTING

C-HOLE TESTING:> The third tracer test (sodium iodide injected in

borehole c#1 on 6/18196) has continued for threemonths. Observing of changes in concentration of tracer materials continues;interpreted breakthrough In 22 days, concentration peak after 68 days and steadily declining.Reactive (sorbing) tracer test to determine radionuclide travel time are on hold pending grant ofstate permitField determinations with the chromatograph continue are still variable but generally Indicate

an upward trend In iodide concentration at C-3 over the weekend. This reverses the trend seenpreviously. pump In C-3 continues to operate at about 153gpm. Cumulative volume pumpedfrom the C-3 borehole during the current series of tests exceeds 25 million gallons

G-2 TESTING:o Initiated initial pump test on 418196, draw down to

4125196; monitoring recovery since thenSlow recovery to current level at approximately 2 feet beloworiginal water elevation; barometric pressure changes evidentin curve

11

Al

Sampling Locations in ESF:Nnirth nol Chlorine=36IDwou I ImUai South Portal

* Systematic samples, 78+57200m spacing,

* Feature based samples75+00J

* B=indication of "young"Cl-36 bearing water, "Bomb Pulse"

70+a

Alcove

B 35+05 n=1 (43+63)nnl - -7 35+45n1 B(44+20)n=1 ,35+5Sn=1 \\

1! B(14+00)n=1

63+47. 19-9-96

Extent ofAnases9-1%§25+00

_ :0 N From: Fabryka-Martin,et a 3196

Drawing Not To Scale125.nrc.tynan.cdr 9/4/96


STATUS OF KEY 1996 DELIVERABLESSynthesis Report "Characterization of Fractures atYucca Mountain" ( 3GGF205M; ESF, surfacegeology, pavement mapping data); received and inreview"Geologic Map of Yucca Mountain" (3GGF204M);received and in review

- Tectonics and volcanism synthesis reportsreceived and in review

- ESF Mapping deliverable s due) 60 - 4+00 due end 9196, report and maps

4- 28+00 due end 9196, report and maps> 27-55+00 due end 9196, maps and line survey data


Thermal Test Concerns Raised by NRC1) By heating the rock mass to 4000C temperature, near

drift wall phenomena such as gravity driven refluxing Idripping may not occur

2) Relative importance of advection and bouyant flow maybe very different at 4000C

3) Is there a risk of instruments being affected by formationof saline brine

4) Would the clay in fractures behave differently at 4000Cthan at 2000C

5) How can the hydrologic flow heterogeneity expected inthe repository be studied in the test if there is nomoisture in the fractures of the dryout zone, because ofthe 4000C temperatures

3f


Other Concerns of the NRC

-Status of the large block testX Likely to be an FY'97 activity; currently, testing suspendedv NRC should be aware that the test plan scope may be

modified in coming monthsv Dimensions of the block are__


Other Concerns of the NRCThermal testing and related concerns- thermal load design needed to be addressed in links to

testing planned should be clear- document issues related to drill and blast operations;

impacts on rock from construction; drill and blast may bebad construction method for alcove construction. Alpineminer may be better

- test location may not be representative- DIE background work sufficient for thermal test; water

issues- Future plans for testing in the ESF

Significance of fracture zones (60+00-head)

3e

SupportInformation

*esf55-04a* *esf55-0 4 a*3D,fIx=O.O,all,280md,.86atm, 1 drft, 1.1 25kW/m, 1 25W/m2(4.5<T

TIME(YEARS) = 1

.,

ta:

,I 34

0.

21.

41.

61.

82.

102.

I 122.

142.

- 163.

183.

203.u

METERS

busch /us3/fnuoulpuVesI55-01 Extool version: 16.16Sun Jun 23 16:21:07 1996

V/

*esf55-01 a* *esf55-O1 a*3D,fIx=.05,all,1 .9microd,.86atm,1 drft,1.1 25kW/m,1 25W/m2(T

TIME(YEARS) = 1

A:

i 345ME

C

22.

45.

67.

h9.

-. 112.

--134.

-156.

-178.

201.

223.

I.

u

METERS

busch Ius3/nuIIoulpuVesl55-O0 Extool version: 16.16 Sal Jun 22 21:51:11 1996

.9?-

*estb5-01 aa* *esf55- O1 aa*3D,fIx=.05,all,1 .9microd,.86atm, 1 drft, 1.1 25kW/m,1 25W/mT

TIME(YEARS) = 3

cn

*5

o.

32.

128.

-160.

-] 192.

224.

256.

288.

320.

METERS

busch lus3lnulfoutpuVesl55-O1 Extool version: 16.16 Sun Jun 23 15:55:17 1996

'/3.

*esf55-04a* *esf55-040*3D,flx=O.Oall280md,.86atm,1 drft, 1.1 25kW/m, 1 25W/m2(4.5<T

TIME(YEARS) = 4

320 0.

325 _ 5.

330 _ 1_70.

335 1 v v *085. 70.

L 340lI I 12 1 4

350 _ 11109.11 a_ _ | .

244.

279.

314.365

349.m

UMETERS

busch /us3/nuft/outpuVes5501 Extool verson: 16.16 Mon Jun 24 10:02:01 1996

lesf55-O1 aa *esf55-O1 aa43Dflx=.05,all,1 .9microd,.86atm,1 drft, 1.1 25kW/m,1 25W/rTEMPERATURES ALONG UNE IN HEATER HORIZON THROUGH MDPOINT 0 DRIFT HEATER

NORMAL TO DRIFT HEATER AXIS--_

I,

:

C

I'

c

C

crv

IiC

x (m)Ca

Ib AMRi Exiwmt V'on: 1W16 Wed Atvj 14 1ZI21 1996

5 3'.

*esfS5-501 aa* esf55-O 1 aa*3D,f Ix=.05,all, 1 .9microd,.86atm. 1 drft, 1 .1 25kW/m, 125W/rnTEMPERATURES ALONG LINE IN HEATER HORIZON THROUGH L4IDPOINT OF DRIFT HEATER

NORMAL TO DRIFT HEATER AXIS350 I I I ' ' ' I ' ' ' I ' ' ' '

ZER PCOLATON

300-

2CO- / I'J. i \\i~~~~~*

CG

It

C.c

tr

r

. x (m)

beo AAQWUI Wo AvafEp on 1616 WedAug 14 122:54 196

. I

d

Oesf55-O1 aa *esf55-O1aa*3Dflx=.05,all,I .9microc,.86atm, 1 drft, 1 .1 25kW/-n,1 25W/mTEMPERATURES ALONG LINE IN HEATER HORIZON THROUGH MIDPOINT OF DRIFT HEATER

NORMAL TO DRIFT HEATER AXIS

PERCOLATION FlUX = 05 mm/fr

- - - .

iv

I-

C

z.I

p

C

C

�1

C

�C

ll�

'. I..

__ T_____ - 1.5..-...---- TtE(YERMS - 2

___ - - TECMAIM 3

J .1. -L L J I I -k.30 35

x m)

Ife Almftb" Exteohenwr. 1t4Wod Ato 14 13111:31 1996

*es,55-D1 aa* esf55-O 1 aa3D,flx=.05Oll,1 .gmicrod..86otm, 1 drft, 1 .1 25kW/m, 1 25W/rmTEMPERATURES ALONG LINE IN PLANE ONE METER ABOVE HEATER HORIZONDRAWN FROM DIRECTLY ABOVE CENTER OF DRIFT HEATER NORMAL TO AXIS

A~~~~~~~. 1%

'I

k

COIIDUCTiCN 0ILY

. \~~~~~~~11

< A.. In1% -

i II

c

- YEARS - .5

5-......

.... .

K

loo AaII.ff w ion 1Q16 VeedAiu� 14 14.11:36 1".1

c

*0sf55-04a* *esf5-04a 30,flx=O.O,all,280md,.86atm, 1 drft,1 .1 25kW/m, 1 25W/rm2(4.5<TEMPERATURES ALONG LINE IN PLANE ONE METER ABOVE HEATER HORIZONDRAWN FROM DIRECTLY ABOVE CENTER OF DRIFT HEATER NORMAL TO DRIFT

CC

4

C.c

rt

fC

ZERD PERCOLATION

, _r

C

r

cr. Iir

cCl

I.

IC1

C

1

*. � _ s

7IWEIYEAS w 1.5. Esn. 2

_ _ _ _ AdEYES 3

x (m) c

kg Amftff heoo V3"bo: 161l VindAul 14 12gOOt! 136

.

esf55-O laa esf55-01ta3D,flx=.05,all,1 .9microd,.86atn,ldrft,1 .1 25kW/m,125W/mTEMPERATURES ALONG LINE IN PLANE ONE METER ABOVE HEATER HORIZONDRAWN FROM DIRECTLY ABOVE CENTER OF DRIFT HEATER NORMAL TO DRIFT350 . * I a I * * * * * * _ *

PERCOLATION FLUX .05 mm/yr

300_

250

200-IO~H.,... .. _..... \

1

.5.~ ~~~1c

C

C.

Cc

TIIAE((EARS) 1.5T... £RS) - 2

-_ - - - TIME(MRS) 3

x (m)c

1o AMAG ff Ee wsimo 16.16 VisdAAjg 14 13A129 1996

*esf55-.O0la* esf55-O1aa3D,flx=.05,all,1 .9mlcrod.8otmo,1 drft,1.1 25kW/,n1 25W/mVERTICAL TEMPERATURE PROF-ILE THROUGH WING HEATERS

N0.4 FROM DRIFT HEATER AXIS

couRucnoNi ONLU

'A\

SC/ - -1II

4

z (m)

lee holes Exwxeltof m" %oSdAI4 14 1:4925 1"6

-5( A-

esfS5-04a* esf55-04a*3Dflx=O.O,al,25Omd,.86atm, 1drft, 1.1 25kW/m. 1 25W/m2(4.5<VERTICAL TEMPERATURE PROFILE THROUGH WING HEATERS

10.4 m FROM DRIFT HEATER AXIS

j

ZERD PERCOAIIN

A

I I I

I t& I

. I

I S

' I"

I \%I

L)

I

I

IF/ I

/

!

II

1%

1%

TIM .- 1.5..... .__TIIJE(YE"S 2-_-___- TN - 3

z (m)

ke Ailmw Etol WSon; 1616 Wod Aug 14 i I:Wol 1996

0

Al

*g3d4Oacl* *g 1 32xbt*3D,ftx=.05,all,280md,.86otm.1 drft,1 .OkW/m,. 1 25W/m2(4<x<qm)1 8VERTICAL TEMPERATURE PROFILE THROUGH WING HEATERS

10.4 m FROM DRIFT HEATER AXIS_

I v v I I I F ---- I - v * F

PERCOLATION RATE .05 mm/yr

----- T - I ...- - -

300J-

A

.'

250i

I

I

.

\ .

I '\2000

I-;

150

II

/II

CI'

i

i

C

C

C5 I

CC

CI

TMKYEMKS), 1.5. .. . MECY RS -2

-- -- -- TM"(iARS - 3_

z (n)

crom lr ff.16 WedAug 14 11:04:11 1996

H l TEM rmPti I D T MPL o w rc t f,

z o - S CI15o -ZOo C

10 - IgoC_

'Low

IUl

Uniform Temperature Load Parallel to DriftTemperature at GQu Year

Mwo ~~~~~~x

._~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~7

temp

so~~~~~~~~~~~~~~6

238

192

98 ~~169

ci)loM C

.1

Varying Temperature Load Parallel to DriftTemperature at 0.67 Years

7

CL)

YaX~(S

.168M156

145134123111100

300

8320

340 0~~~~~~

380

380 ~t= 4yr

0 50 100 150 200 250 300Temperature (C)

Figure 17. Vertical temperature profile along the center-line of a row of drift-emplaced, large-WP-sized heatersgenerating a lineal heat load of 0.8 kW/m and flanked bytwo horizontal-borehole-emplaced wing heater arrays. Theheater arrays are generating an APD of 105 W/m2 over theinterval 4 < lx < 9 m and 157.5 W/m2 over the interval 9 <Ld < 14 m from the drift centerline at = 4 yr. Bulk perme-

ability kb = 280 millidarcy, and vapor diffusion tortuosityfactor eff = 0.2. Curves are shown for two different thermalconductivity Kth sets, including the RIB version 3 Kth values(reference case) and the RIB version 4 Kth values.

Civilian Radioactive WasteManagement SystemManagement & OperatingContractor

Ta~Eiff

TRW Environmental SafetySystems Inc.

Engineering Design Description

Jack N. BaileySeptember 12, 1996

0

I

B&W Federal ServicesDuke Engineering & Services, Inc.Fluor Daniel, Inc.Framatome Cogema FuelsIntegrated Resources GroupINTERA, Inc.JAI Corporation

JK Research Associates, Inc.Kiewit/Parsons BrinkerhoffLawrence Berkeley LaboratoryLawrence Livermore National LaboratoryLos Alamos National LaboratoryMorrison-Knudsen Corporation

Science Applications International CorporationSandia National LaboratoriesTRW Environmental Safety Systems Inc.Woodward-Clyde Federal ServicesWinston & StrawnCooperating Federal Agency:

U.S. Geological Survey

Engineering Design Description

One Pass Program

Ongoing development of a Single Design to support:

Viability AssessmentEnvironmental Impact Statement andLicense Application

Developed over 5 year period


LV.EIO.JNB.09/96.036 2 919/96

Engineering Design Description (Con't)

Prioritized to:Meet needs of each area above,Identify latest design for post-closure evaluations andAddress likely regulatory issues associated with

first of a kind

Establishes adequate design basis to support Licensing butnot construction


LV.EIO.JNB.09/964M 3 99196

Engineering Design Description (Con't)I |~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Initial Design Efforts focus on VA:

Support to Performance AssessmentDesign of selected systems structures and components

Corrosion models & associated testing programs

Feasibility of technology of PA designExisting technology use in new applications

Underground ventilation


LV.EIO.JNB.09/96-W036 4 9/9/96


Cost to construct

Evaluate and develop design for significant cost driversGround Support

Establish regulatory basis for planning

Basis for regulatory acceptance precedented- yes or noIdentify acceptance criteria

Radiological waste processing systemsBare spent fuel handling operations

Determine level of detail for license submittalBinning

Civilian Radioactive Waste LV.EO.JNB.09/98436 5 9/9/

Management SystemManagement & OperatingContractor


Means of prioritizing

Binning Identifies priorities for level of detail at time ofLicense submittal:

Bin.3

Bin 2

Bin 1

Radiological involvement - No regulatoryprecedent

Radiological involvement - Regulatoryprecedent

No radiological involvement


LV.EIO.JNB.09A)6-. 6 919/96


Developed priorities to support ViabilityAssessment

Performance assessmentUse of existing technologyCostingLicensing planning

Use of expert panels to guide process


LV.EIOJB.09/96-036 7 919/96


Basic Design Development

Advanced Conceptual Design as Point of Departure

Identification of Systems Structures and Components

Development of Design Basis Events

Classification of System Structures and Components


LV.EIO.JN.09196036 8 9/9/96

.1


Identification of SSC design requirements considering

Postclosure performance requirementsPreclosure safety considerations and regulatory

precedentMDGS RequirementsIndustry codes and standardsetc.


LV.EIO.JNB.09f96-036 9 9/9196


Phases of Design and Products

Phase 1 Support to VAMajor decisions with regard to PA

Waste Package MaterialsMaterials of construction

Use of ConcreteInitial testing results

Cathodic ProtectionRepository Basic parameters on layout,

thermal, drift diameterEstablish basic design requirements for

the majority of SSCs


LV.EIO.JNS.09/96-036 10 9/9196

.


Considered as part of viability assessment

Phase 2 Interface for License Application

Design to support Preclosure radiological analysis

Design to support licensing for Bin 3 and some Bin 2

Phase 3 -Completion of Bin 1 and "fill-out" of Bin 2,and continuation of design

Civilian Radioactive Waste MV E10.0996-036 11 9/9/96


Engineering Design Description (Conit)I 11 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~-

Design Control

Controlled documentation

Traceability of Design to:

Performance Assessment,

Costing and

Licensing documentation


LV.EIO.JNB.09/96-036 12 9/9/96

.1


One Pass Approach requires:

Control and documentation of design evolution,

Traceability of design requirements and design

solutions

Documentation of design decisions and alternatives

considered

Pointers to regulatory requirement solutions


LV.EIO.JN8.O98-O38 13 919/96


Documentation Design exists "in Process" on theboards

Design

Design

drawing and document list is summarized for VA

is described at the time of the License Application


LV.EIO.JNB.09/96-036 14 9/9196

U.S. Department of EnergyOffice of Civilian Radioactive Waste

Management

Spent Nuclear Fuel EffectiveThermal Conductivity Methodology

PRESENTED TONRC

PRESENTED BYThomas W. Doering

Manager, Waste Package Designim. | Robert H. Bahney III, Thomas L. Lotz

September 12, 1996

Overview

* Purpose

* Criteria and Technical Approach

* Industry Applications

L Cladding Temperature Methodologies

* Development of Methodology

* Benchmark Evaluations

* Findings and Conclusions


nimal.ppt 2 9/11/96

Purpose

* Effective Thermal Conductivity Reportdocuments methodology for predicting peakcladding temperatures

* Temperature limits maintain SNF cladding

- barrier (defense-in-depth) to radionuclide release

- maintain assembly geometry within waste package

* Open discussion of methodology with NRC

Civilian Radioactive Waste nfnml.ppt 3 9I11/9Management SystemManagement & OperatingContractor

Effective Thermal Conductivity

* Effective thermal conductivity methodologypredicts peak cladding temperatures withinany SNF container with a dry fill gas.

* Methodology provides a "best estimate" ofPWR and BWR cladding temperatures invarious container fill environments

* Applicable over the range of conditionsexpected in the potential repository

Civilian Radioactive Waste snfr~c .ppI 4 9/11/96


0

Thermal Criteria for Disposal

U Drift wall temperature < 2000C

* SNF cladding temperature < 3500C

* Access drift temperature < 500C for 50 years afteremplacement

* Calico Hills and TSw3 rock temperature < 1 150C

* Ground surface temperature rise < 20C

- Maximize time WP above boiling consistent withthermal loading strategy


snnrCI.Wppt 5 911is8

Four Model Thermal Analysis Approach

aJr *a'-c -*

,. ... 1

,- .- - ,f

.. tt . .

i*: . v t,+ "Ig* 4. *. .L..t w

Repository DiskLong-Term Response

Due to Thermal Loading

Drift EmplacementProvide Time-Dependent

Boundary Conditionsfor Near-Field

to "' = - Pf

D0000 0 0 9@f :

DOOGOODO0OOO@@

1/4 SNF AssemblyPeak Cladding Temperatures

(Effective Conductivity)

Waste PackageIncorporate Specific Materials

and Design Configuration

.

Industry Applications* Demonstrate compliance with temperature

limits imposed on SNF to ensure claddingintegrity (by precluding creep rupture)

- Originally developed for waste packagethermal design (disposal)

- Applicable to any dry SNF canister(storage and transportation)

* Methodology supersedes previously used(and limited) empirical correlations (e.g.,Wooton-Epstein)

Civilian Radioactive Waste nrcl.ppt 7 9111s8


Advantages to Industry.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0

* Effective thermal conductivity methodologyprovides best estimate of cladding temperatures

- Considers conductivity of fill gas (e.g., helium)

- Replace empirical approximation with increasedconfidence and known (appropriate) factor of safety

- Benefit to SNF container design capacity

* Calculation process is simple and benchmarked

Civilian Radioactive Waste snhrl.ppt a 9/11/96


^ ls .

Cladding Temperature Methodologies

* Explicit model of every rod and heattransfer mechanism

Most accurate estimation (complex)Costly in setup and computational timeNot suited for parametric evaluation

- Empirical correlation (Wooton-Epstein)Limited range of applicability(horizontal PWR array in air)Multiple calculation steps (complex)

Civilian Radioactive Waste nf1nC.ppM 9 9/98Management SystemManagement & OperatingContractor

Waste Package Thermal Model UsingSNF Effective Thermal Conductivity

Intact Arrayof SNF Rods

SNF Assembly Modeledas a Smeared Heat

Source to AllowI I 7 More Modeling

Detail in the\&; > ..- \WP Internal

Structure

d .

If S

Cladding Temperature Methodologies (Continued)

* Effective thermal conductivity

Homogeneous SNF assembly

Conduction approximation of heat transfermechanisms

Use as part of SNF container thermal model

Benchmarked against SNF storage tests andexplicit models

Ideal for parametric evaluation and transients

Civilian Radioactive Waste srftrcl 11 919/96

Management SystemManagement & OperatingContractor I

Development of Methodology

* Detailed 1/4 assembly 2-D ANSYS model

* Multiple assembly geometries17x17, 15x15, and 14x14 PWRs9x9, 8x8, and 7x7 BWRsWith and without BWR channelsWith and without BWR water rods

* Helium, vacuum, nitrogen, and argon fillenvironments for horizontal SNF container

* Conduction and explicit thermal radiation

Civilian Radioactive Waste snfnrcl.ppt 12 9/996Management SystemManagement & OperatingContractor

.S I

ANSYS 5.1APR 8 1996

TemperatureDegrees C

Min =300Max =317

300301302

IMM 303F" 303r7'i 304EI 305arm 306I!M 307

!M 308P@! 308

309MS-- 310!!ff 311L ~J 312L__1 312EZJ 313ari 314

F" 315EP M, 316E!!M 317

Temperatures in17x17 PWR SNFAssembly withHelium Fill Gas

17x17 WE PWR SNF Assembly - 750 atts with 300 C Basket

ANSYS 5.1MAY 31 1996


Min =250Max =261

250251251

SE!N 252PRk 252fl- 253l T] 253CT= 254Ew-9 254Aft- 255HP-q 256PWMI 256M!! 257

KV-91 257L l 258LIEl 258IZZI 259IarJ 259PEN 260OMw 261RIM 261

Temperatures in9x9 BWR SNFAssembly withHelium Fill Gas

9x9 BWR SNF w/80 mil Channel - 300 W w 250 C Basket a I d

I " 3 1

SNF Assembly Thermal Model Results* Evaluated over a parametric range:

25, 50, 100, 150, 200, 250, 300, 350, 4000C250, 500, 750, 1000 watts for PWRs100, 200, 300, 400, 500, 600 watts for BWRs

- Results indicate that detailed SNF model provides"best estimate" of cladding temperatures

* Cladding to basket temperature drop is non-linearfunction. of SNF basket temperature (due to radiationcomponent) and decay heat of assembly

* Alternate Wooton-Epstein calculation predicts abouttwice the temperature drop for helium fill gas

Civilian Radioactive Waste WfrC.pp" 15 91195Management SystemManagement & OperatingContractor

Calculation of Effective Thermal Conductivity

* Compare assembly model to a homogeneoussmearedmproperty heat-generating square

Use analytical solution of heat diffusion equationCalculate isotropic effective thermal conductivityPerform for each heat load and temperature case

* Define as a function of SNF basket temperaturefor use when SNF basket temperature is known

e Define as a function of SNF assembly mediantemperature for use in finite element (FEA) orfinite difference analyses

Civilian Radioactive Waste snfnhclppt 16 911/96Management SystemManagement & OperatingContractor

,. .

. .

PWR Effective Thermal Conductivities V I

1.6

1.4

E

0%Y-

E

0)

I-0

w

1.2

1.0

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.00 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400

Assembly Median Temperature (Degrees C)

BY

E

*0c)

C0

0ci)

a)

c)04-0-ci

BWR (wI Channel) Effective Thermal Conductivities1.6

Recommended for Horizontal 9x9 BWRSNF Assembly with 80 mil Channel

1.4 ...1 .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - - - - - - --.. . . . . . . .HeimFlGa

1.2.Calculated from BWR with:

Nitrogen Fill Gasr ........... Argon Fill Gas

0 .8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .......................................... ......... .1.0 ~~~~~~~~~~~~Vacuum (No Fill) \

0.8 1

0.6 Calculated from0.6 .. . . . .. . . . .. . . . .. . . . .. . . .. . . . ..Wooton-Epstein

(9x9 in Air)\

0.4 . _

0 .2 .. ... .. .. . .... . . . . .. .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .

0.00 50 100 150 200 250 300 350


400

t

6 '' e 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~& . 1 ;,

. , , . S

BWR (No Channel) Effective Thermal Conductivities1.6 _

1.4

se

CE

a).-

0

:=IL00

.-

w

1.2

1.0

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.00 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400


Effective Conductivity Comparison for Helium1.6

1.4

IeE

.tC0

Ca

1.2

1.0

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.00 50 100 150 200 250 300 350' AnAd

a

Assembly Median Temperature (Degrees C)tv .

41 I -

Effective Conductivity Comparison for Nitrogen1.6

1.4

le

£

C).-

.0

00C)

I-0)

0

.-a)

'4-w

1.2

1.0

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.00 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400


ANSYS 5.1MAY 24 1996


Min =75Max =214

768389

PM 9766 103

. 110Fn 117

RN'" 124f!! 130Up 138MMt 145OM 151Ace 159ERF 165E~J 172Lii] 179Liii 186PFM 192MMt 200NM 206PMb 214

TN-24P Half CaskBenchmark,Horizontal withHelium Fill Gas.Assy. DI Guide TubeMeasured: 206.20CCalculated: 208.20C

24 PWR TN-24P Temperatures for Horizontal Helium Test C,. 4 '

"N

Findings and Conclusions

* Temperature-dependent SNF assemblyeffective thermal conductivities developed toprovide a simple method for calculating a"best estimate" of SNF peak claddingtemperature

* Benchmark results agreed with reported SNFstorage cask testing

* Reproducible calculation using an industrystandard code (ANSYS)

Civilian Radioactive Waste entm1.ppt 23 9,1/8Management SystemManagement & OperatingContractor

minutes of the september 12. 1996 u.s. nuclear regulatory ... · * thermal test facility access...

Documents