NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this interim report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance.
Support for this study was provided by the U.S. Department of Energy, under Grant No. DE-FC01-94EW54069. All opinions, findings, conclusions, and recommendations expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Department of Energy.
International Standard Book Number: 0-309-06928-9
Additional copies of this report are available from:
National Academy Press
2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W. Box 285 Washington, DC 20055 800-624-6242 202-334-3313 (in the Washington Metropolitan Area) http://www.nap.edu
Copyright 2000 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America.
THE NATIONAL ACADEMICS
National Academy of Sciences
National Academy of Engineering
Institute of Medicine
National Research Council
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts is president of the National Academy of Sciences.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. William A. Wulf is president of the National Academy of Engineering.
The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Kenneth I. Shine is president of the Institute of Medicine.
The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy's purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts and Dr. William A. Wulf are chairman and vice chairman, respectively, of the National Research Council.
Committee on the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant
B. JOHN GARRICK, Chair,
PLG, Incorporated (retired), Laguna Beach, California
MARK D. ABKOWITZ,
Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee
ALFRED W. GRELLA,
Grella Consulting, Locust Grove, Virginia
MIKE P. HARDY,
Agapito Associates, Inc., Grand Junction, Colorado
STANLEY KAPLAN,
Bayesian Systems Inc., Rockville, Maryland
HOWARD M. KINGSTON,
Duquesne University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
W. JOHN LEE,
Texas A&M University, College Station
MILTON LEVENSON,
Bechtel International, Inc. (retired), Menlo Park, California
WERNER F. LUTZE,
University of New Mexico, Albuquerque
KIMBERLY OGDEN,
University of Arizona, Tucson
MARTHA R. SCOTT,
Texas A&M University, College Station
JOHN M. SHARP, JR.,
The University of Texas, Austin
PAUL G. SHEWMON,
Ohio State University (retired), Columbus
JAMES WATSON, JR.,
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
CHING H. YEW,
The University of Texas (retired), Austin
Board on Radioactive Waste Management Liaison
DARLEANE C. HOFFMAN,
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Oakland, California
Staff
KEVIN D. CROWLEY, Director
THOMAS E. KIESS, Study Director
ANGELA R. TAYLOR, Senior Project Assistant
Board on Radioactive Waste Management
JOHN F. AHEARNE, Chair,
Sigma Xi and Duke University, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina
CHARLES MCCOMBIE, Vice-Chair, Consultant,
Gipf-Oberfrick, Switzerland
ROBERT M. BERNERO, Consultant,
Bethesda, Maryland
ROBERT J. BUDNITZ,
Future Resources Associates, Inc., Berkeley, California
GREGORY R. CHOPPIN,
Florida State University, Tallahassee
JAMES H. JOHNSON, JR.,
Howard University, Washington, D.C.
ROGER E. KASPERSON,
Clark University, Worcester, Massachusetts
JAMES O. LECKIE,
Stanford University, Stanford, California
JANE C.S. LONG,
Mackay School of Mines, University of Nevada, Reno
ALEXANDER MACLACHLAN,
E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Company (retired), Wilmington, DE
WILLIAM A. MILLS,
Oak Ridge Associated Universities (retired), Olney, Maryland
MARTIN J. STEINDLER,
Argonne National Laboratories (retired), Argonne, Illinois
ATSUYUKI SUZUKI,
University of Tokyo, Japan
JOHN J. TAYLOR,
Electric Power Research Institute (retired), Palo Alto, California
VICTORIA J. TSCHINKEL,
Landers and Parsons, Tallahassee, Florida
MARY LOU ZOBACK,
U.S. Geological Survey, Menlo Park, California
Staff
KEVIN D. CROWLEY, Director
ROBERT S. ANDREWS, Senior Staff Officer
THOMAS E. KIESS, Senior Staff Officer
GREGORY H. SYMMES, Senior Staff Officer
JOHN R. WILEY, Senior Staff Officer
SUSAN B. MOCKLER, Research Associate
TONI GREENLEAF, Administrative Associate
LATRICIA C. BAILEY, Senior Project Assistant
MATTHEW BAXTER-PARROTT, Project Assistant
LAURA D. LLANOS, Senior Project Assistant
ANGELA R. TAYLOR, Senior Project Assistant
Commission on Geosciences, Environment, and Resources
GEORGE M. HORNBERGER (Chair),
University of Virginia, Charlottesville
RICHARD A. CONWAY,
Union Carbide Corporation (Retired), S. Charleston, West Virginia
LYNN GOLDMAN,
Johns Hopkins School of Hygiene and Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland
THOMAS E. GRAEDEL,
Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut
THOMAS J. GRAFF,
Environmental Defense, Oakland, California
EUGENIA KALNAY,
University of Maryland, College Park
DEBRA KNOPMAN,
Progressive Policy Institute, Washington, DC
BRAD MOONEY, J.
Brad Mooney Associates, Ltd., Arlington, Virginia
HUGH C. MORRIS,
El Dorado Gold Corporation, Vancouver, British Columbia
H. RONALD PULLIAM,
University of Georgia, Athens
MILTON RUSSELL,
Joint Institute for Energy and Environment and University of Tennessee (Emeritus), Knoxville
ROBERT J. SERAFIN,
National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, Colorado
ANDREW R. SOLOW,
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, Massachusetts
E-AN ZEN,
University of Maryland, College Park
MARY LOU ZOBACK,
U.S. Geological Survey, Menlo Park, California
Staff
ROBERT M. HAMILTON, Executive Director
GREGORY H. SYMMES, Associate Executive Director
JEANETTE SPOON, Administrative and Financial Officer
DAVID FEARY, Scientific Reports Officer
SANDI FITZPATRICK, Administrative Associate
MARQUITA SMITH, Administrative Assistant/Technology Analyst
Acknowledgments
This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the National Research Council (NRC) Report Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in making the published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We wish to thank the following individuals for their participation in the review of this report:
Tom Borak, Colorado State University
Edith Boyden, Volpe National Transportation Systems Center
Robert Budnitz, Future Resources Associates, Inc.
Allen Glazner, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Lawrence Johnson, National Cooperative for the Disposal of Radioactive Waste
Joseph Leary, Independent Consultant
Solomon Levy, Levy & Associates
Hank Mevzelaar, University of Utah
Randall Seright, New Mexico Institute of Technology
Although the individuals listed above have provided constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations, nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of this report was overseen by E-an Zen, appointed by the Commission on Geosciences, Environment, and Resources, and Frank Parker, appointed by the Report Review Committee, who were responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with NRC procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the authoring committee and the NRC.
Preface
This report is the product of a National Research Council (NRC) committee study sponsored by the U. S. Department of Energy (DOE). The first NRC Committee on the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) began in 1978, and this committee and its successors issued eight letter reports during 1979-1992 and two full reports in 1984 and 1996. The current WIPP committee study is operating under a revised statement of task (see box) derived from a DOE request (Dials, 1997). This interim report addresses selected issues associated with the task statement, as explained below. The committee will comprehensively address the statement of task in the final report.
The specific approach taken in this interim report was to consider how to assess (1) the performance of WIPP in isolating waste from the environment and (2) the basic, minimal requirements and procedures that should be applied to waste management operations. The committee provides recommendations on several issues that it believes merit immediate consideration and action by DOE. Specifically, these issues include the determination of the natural background radioactivity in the area surrounding WIPP, and improvements in TRU waste operations.
This study is organized within the NRC's Board on Radioactive Waste Management and is being conducted by a 15-member committee. Committee members were chosen for their expertise in relevant technical disciplines such as nuclear engineering, health physics, chemical and environmental engineering, civil and transportation engineering, performance assessment, analytical chemistry, materials science and engineering, plutonium geochemistry, hydrogeology, rock and fracture mechanics, petroleum engineering, and mining engineering. As is normal practice of the National Academies, committee members do not represent the views of their institutions, but form an independent body to author this report.
To conduct the study and prepare this interim report, the committee gathered information principally through meetings and reviews of relevant literature. The committee met several times in open public sessions to hear from DOE and its contractors, as well as from other invited speakers such as regulatory agency personnel and groups with an interest in the WIPP program. Committee members prepared this report
using these inputs together with their collective knowledge and experience. The report reflects a consensus of the committee and has been reviewed in accordance with NRC procedures.
Statement of Task The purpose of this study is to identify the limiting technical components of the WIPP program, with a two-fold goal of (i) improving the understanding of long-term performance of the repository and (ii) identifying technical options for improvements to the National TRU Program (i.e., the engineering system that defines TRU waste handling operations that are needed for these wastes to go from their current storage locations to the final repository destination) without compromising safety. To accomplish this goal, the study will address two major issues:
|