The following HTML text is provided to enhance online
readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML.
Please use the page image
as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy.
Assessment of the Performance of Engineered Waste Containment Barriers
are incomplete, or have not been analyzed. The effort to compile and evaluate these data is considerable, but there is enough new information on field performance, material behavior, and monitoring and modeling capabilities to make an assessment of performance worthwhile about every 5 to 10 years. More frequent assessments may be required based on previous monitoring data and performance assessment models.
Recommendation 3: Federal agencies responsible forengineered barrier systems should commission and fundassessments of performance on a regular basis. Giventhe rate at which performance data and knowledge ofwaste behavior, contaminant transport, and monitoringaccumulate, the interval at which these assessmentsshould take place is probably on the order of once every5 to 10 years. The results of the assessment should beplaced in the public domain in a form that is readilyaccessible.
Much data used to predict performance come from laboratory experiments, models, and field-constructed prototype barrier systems (e.g., test pads). Although useful for understanding material properties and behavior, these data are no substitute for performance data collected in the field from operating containment systems. An overall comprehensive assessment of performance requires long-term monitoring and analysis of data from different types of waste containment systems constructed from a variety of components and located in different climate regimes.
Recommendation 4: EPA, USNRC, NSF, and DOEshould establish a set of observatories at operationalcontainment facilities to assess the long-term performanceof waste containment systems at field scale. The programwould involve building one or more field facilities,monitoring the site, and analyzing and archiving thedata. New sites could be created or adjustments couldbe made to existing observatories when promising new andinnovative concepts and materials become available.
Analytical and numerical models are relied on to predict contaminant transport, containment effectiveness, degradation of materials, and changes in behavior over time, even though some models have shortcomings (e.g., they do not account for advection-dispersion processes; they are used in applications for which they were not designed).
Recommendation 5: Regulatory agencies (e.g., EPA,DOE, USNRC) and research sponsors (e.g., NSF) shouldsupport the validation, calibration, and improvementof models to predict the behavior of containmentsystem components and the composite system over longperiods of time. These models should be validated andcalibrated using the results of field observations andmeasurements.
The optimum time for monitoring varies with the facility, type of waste, climate, and the observed performance. Yet funding is often not available to continue monitoring until the site no longer poses risk to human health and the environment, and no national policy exists to assure that such funding will be available.
Recommendation 6: EPA should develop financialassurance mechanisms to ensure that funding is availablefor monitoring and care for as long as the waste poses athreat to human health and the environment.
Performance criteria are needed that account for both barrier performance and impacts to public health and safety that extend beyond the barrier system.
Recommendation 7: EPA and USNRC should develop guidance for the practical implementation of performance-based criteria for assessment of containment systemperformance as an alternative to prescriptive designs.