980072

Milestones for Disposal of Radioactive Waste at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) in the United States
Rob P. Rechard
Prepared by WIPP Performance Albuquerque, and Livermore, Assessment Department, at Sandia National Laboratories New Mexico 87185 California 94550 of Energy
for the United States Department under contract DE-AC04-94AL85000
SAND98-0072 Revised Unlimited Release Printed March 2000 Supersedes SAND98-0072 dated April 1998
Issued by Sandia National Laboratories, operated Department of Energy by Sandm Corporation.
for the United States
NOTICE: This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government, nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, nor any of their contractors, subcontractors, or their employees, make any warranty, express or implied, or assume any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represent that irs use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government, any agency thereof, or any of their contractors or subcontractors. The views and opinions expressed herein do not necessatily state or reflect those of the United States Government, any agency thereof, or any of their contractors. Printed in the United States of America. from the best available copy. This report has been reproduced dire&y
Available to DOE and DOE contractors from Office of Scientific and Technical Information P.O. Box 62 Oak Ridge, TN 37831 Prices available from (703) 605.6000 Web site: hrcp://u~w.ntis.govJordenng.h~ Available to the public from Nation& Techmcal Information U.S. Department of Commerce 5285 Port Royal Rd Springileld, VA 22 16 1
Serwce
SAND98-0072 Revision Unlimited Release Printed March 2000 Supersedes SAND98-0072 dated April 1998
Milestones for Disposal of Radioactive Waste at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) in the United States
Rob P. Rechard Performance Assessment Department (6849) Sandia National Laboratories Albuquerque, NM 87185-0779
Abstract
Six years (1983 to 1989) were spent constructing the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) in southern New Mexico for disposal of transuranic radioactive waste. However, not until 1999, 25 years after its identification as a potential deep geologic repository, did the WIPP receive its first shipment of waste. This report presents a concise history in tabular form of events leading up to its selection, including the development of regulatory criteria, major political conflicts, negotiated agreements, and technical milestones of the WIPP. In general, technical programs and engineering analysis of the WIPP before the mid 1980s were undertaken primarily (1) to develop general understanding of selected natural phenomena, (2) to satisfy needs for environmental impact statements, and (3) to satisfy negotiated agreements between the U.S. Department of Energy and the State of New Mexico. In the final segment of the project, federal compliance policy was developed and technical programs and engineering analysis evolved to assess the compliance of the WIPP with these specific regulations. During this ten-year period, four preliminary performance assessments, one compliance performance assessment, and one verification performance assessment were performed.
Preface
The milestones table for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) Project was originally prepared as a section in the report, An Introduction to the Mechanics of Performance Assessment Using Examples of Calculations Done for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Between 1990 and 1992, SAND93-1378, by Rob P. Rechard. The milestones table, a particularly popular section, has been reproduced separately here and has been updated to include 1996 through 1999. As before, some text accompanies the milestone tables, but the emphasis remains on the tables because of their usefulness in providing a comprehensive but concise history of the WIPP. The usefulness of the milestones table is due in part to Anita Reiser, Darrell Munson, and Wendell Weart, all of Sandia National Laboratories, who helped with verification of information; C. Crawford of ASAP, Inc., who verified references; M. Minahan and J. Chapman, of Tech Reps, Inc., who edited the text; and S. K. Best, of Tech Reps, Inc., who placed the text in tables.
ii
Contents
Acronyms/Initialisms ...................................................................................................................................... v Milestones for Disposal of Radioactive Waste at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant .......................................... 1 Early History of Nuclear Waste Disposal Related to the WIPP............................................................... 1 Early Studies at the WIPP........................................................................................................................ 2 Compliance Setting for the WIPP............................................................................................................ 4 Development of Methodology for Assessing Compliance of the WIPP .................................................. 4 Summary.................................................................................................................................................. 5 Detailed Tabulation of WIPP Milestones ....................................................................................................... 7 References..................................................................................................................................................... 20
iii
iv
Acronyms/Initialisms
A/E architect/engineering firm AEA Atomic Energy Act, either 1946 (Pub. L. 7958560 Stat. 755) or 1954 (Pub. L. 83-70368 Stat. 919) AEC Atomic Energy Commission, the forerunner of the DOE, was formed in 1946 (August 1, 1946, 60 Stat. 755). AG Attorney General AL Albuquerque Operations Office, largest of several operations offices set up by DOE CH-TRU contact-handled Transuranic waste, packaged TRU waste whose external surface dose rate does not exceed 200 mrem per hour and can thus be directly handled by personnel CFR Code of Federal Regulations DCCA Draft Compliance Certification Application, prepared and sent to EPA in 1995 DHLW Defense high-level waste, that is, high-level waste (HLW) that has been generated by the DOE in reprocessing spent nuclear fuel from experimental and military reactors. Because the possibility of commercial reprocessing was stopped under the Carter Administration in 1980 and never initiated thereafter, only about 72 MTHM equivalents from the West Valley Demonstration Project in New York or 0.75% is commercial HLW in the United States. Hence, the distinction between defense and commercial HLW is usually unimportant, except when highlighting the source of HLW or when discussing reprocessing and disposal plans for HLW in the United States prior to 1980. DOE U.S. Department of Energy, formed by DOE Organization Act (Pub. L. 95-91, 91 Stat. 565), which replaced the Energy Research and Development Agency (ERDA). ERDA was formed by the 1974 Energy Reorganization Act (Pub. L. 93-438) and replaced the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), which was formed in 1946 (August 1, 1946, 60 Stat. 755). DOI U.S. Department of Interior DOL U.S. Department of Labor DOT U.S. Department of Transportation EDF Environmental Defense Fund, U.S. environmental special interest group EEG Environmental Evaluation Group, formed in 1978 by New Mexico from funds provided by the DOE to conduct independent technical evaluation of the WIPP. The National Defense Authorization Act, Fiscal Year 1989, Pub. L. 100-456, Section 1433 assigned administrative oversight of EEG to the New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology. EIS Environmental Impact Statement, environmental documentation required by federal law (NEPA) (Pub. L. 91-190) for large, federally funded programs EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, formed by Congress on December 2, 1970, in Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970 (5 U.S.C. 903; 40 CFR 1). In this act, Congress transferred to EPA the tasks of monitoring research, setting standards, and performing enforcement activities related to pollution abatement and control such that the environment could be considered as a single, interrelated system.
ALARA As low as reasonably achievable with costs and benefits taken into account; a basic policy of radiation protection initially proposed in 1948 and promulgated by NRC in 1975. BRWM Board of Radioactive Waste Management, a permanent board formed in 1968 in the National Research Council, the operating agency of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences (NAS) BSPP Bedded Salt Pilot Plant, initial name for WIPP in 1974 C&C Consultation and Cooperation Agreement Between the State of New Mexico and the DOE CAG Compliance Application Guide, a non-binding guidance document developed by the EPA to supplement the WIPP implementing regulation, Title 40 CFR Part 191 CAMCON Compliance Assessment Methodology CONtroller, computational system for assessing the performance of a disposal system (usually for nuclear wastes). When first developed in the early 1990s, this information management system provided for (1) the interfacing of individual computer codes of the WIPP PA modeling system, and (2) quality assurance of the computations. CAO Carlsbad Area Office, DOE office for managing WIPP Project, was formed in 1993 to replace the WIPP Project Integration Office (WPIO) that had been established in 1991, and the WIPP Project Office (WPO), which had been created in the 1980s and moved to Carlsbad, NM, in 1984. CARD Citizens Against Radioactive Dumping, New Mexico special interest group CCA Compliance Certification Application to the EPA to evaluate compliance with Title 40 CFR Part 191 of the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant; application coordinated by Westinghouse for the DOE with input from Sandia National Laboratories
ERDA Energy Research and Development Agency, a forerunner of the DOE, was formed in 1974 (Pub. L. 93-438). FEPs features, events (natural and anthropogenic phenomena of short duration), and processes (natural phenomena of long duration) GAO General Accounting Office, U.S. Congress HLW High-level (radioactive) waste, ". . . the highly radioactive material [fission products and some actinides,] resulting from the reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel, including liquid waste produced directly in reprocessing and any solid material derived from such liquid waste that contains fission products in sufficient concentrations . . ." (NWPA, 1982, 2[12])F26. Although not used in this manner in this report, general articles regarding radioactive waste use the term high-level waste to imply any combination of spent nuclear fuel and HLW (and sometimes transuranic [TRU] waste) that requires disposal in a deep, geologic repository. 10 CFR 60, which was promulgated by the NRC prior to NWPA, also includes spent nuclear fuel in its definition of high-level waste. HSWA Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 (Pub. L. 98-616) (see also RCRA) IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Austria, established in 1957 by General Assembly of the United Nations to foster research and development in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy INEEL Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory, a multiprogram laboratory in Idaho Falls, Idaho, furnishing engineering services and products on primarily nuclear energy and related technologies. The Idaho Chemical Processing Plant (ICPP) at the Idaho site processes highly enriched uranium fuel from spent nuclear fuel stored at the site. In addition to receiving spent nuclear fuel from throughout the DOE defense complex, it stores a large volume of TRU waste from Rocky Flats destined for the WIPP. Prior to 1970, it buried this TRU waste, but now stores it on the surface. IRG Interagency Review Group on Nuclear Waste Management. The Carter Administration formed this group on the recommendation of Secretary of Energy Schlesinger. The group consisted of the DOE and eight other agencies together with several entities within the Executive Branch, including the Council on Environmental Quality. LANL Los Alamos National Laboratory, a multiprogram laboratory in Los Alamos, NM, conducting research and development on all facets of nuclear weapon design and basic research in a
variety of areas. A large volume of TRU waste stored on site is destined for the WIPP. LEAF Legal Environmental Assistance Foundation, U.S. environmental special interest group LWA Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Land Withdrawal Act (Pub. L. 102-579 106 Stat. 4777) MED Manhattan Engineering District of Army Corps of Engineers; assigned task of developing atomic bomb in 1942 MIT Massachusetts Institute of Technology MTHM metric tons of heavy metal; regulatory mass unit in Title 40 CFR Part 191 where heavy metal is all the uranium, plutonium, and thorium initially placed in a nuclear power reactor MRS Monitored Retrievable Storage Facility for spent fuel from commercial power reactors, proposed in 1982 in NWPA and discussed in 1987 in NWPAA (see also RSSF) NAS National Academy of Sciences, a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research. The Academy was chartered by Congress in 1863 with the mandate to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. NEFTRAN network flow and transport computer program NEPA National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, federal law that sets environmental policy by requiring an environmental impact statement on all major federal project (Pub. L. No. 91-190, 83 Stat. 852) NMED New Mexico Environment Department. NRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission, formed by the 1974 Energy Reorganization Act (Pub. L. 93-438) from the tomic Energy Commission NRDC Natural Resources Defense environmental special interest group Council, U.S.
NWPA Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 provides a national policy for the interim storage, monitored retrievable storage, and eventual disposal of radioactive waste. NWPAA Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1987, amendments to the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 specifying that only a repository site at Yucca Mountain was to be characterized by the DOE and placing less emphasis on the monitored retrievable storage option ORNL Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Y-12 Plant, Oak Ridge Reservation, Oak Ridge, TN. A large volume of TRU waste in storage is destined for the WIPP. OTA Office of Technology Assessment, U.S. Congress
vi
PA Performance assessment, the process of assessing whether a system meets a set of performance criteria. For the WIPP PA, the process is a stochastic simulation. The system is a deep geologic repository disposal system (in salt) for DOE TRU waste. The performance criteria are various long-term environmental metrics in U.S. government regulations (not short-term operational safety issues). PRA Probabilistic risk assessment, the process of assessing, through a stochastic simulation, the risks from a system. A PRA is identical to a performance assessment (PA) in the United States; however, the connotations of the two terms differ. A PRA usually connotes (a) a system composed solely of human-engineered components, and (b) performance criteria that include risk to health over a short time (e.g., human lifetime) relative to geologic time. A PA usually connotes a system composed of both natural and human-engineered components over geologic time. Because the time frame is different, many phenomena for a PRA can be termed events (short-term phenomena); because the components are all human engineered, measured failure rates of components are often available. The modeling tools in a PRA can include elaborate event and fault trees and can substitute empirical data for mechanistic models. For a WIPP PA, the event trees are simpler, fault trees are not used, and mechanistic models are used directly. QA quality assurance, all those planned and systemic actions necessary to provide adequate confidence that a structure, system, or component will perform satisfactorily in service. Quality assurance for a product is ensuring that the product does what it is supposed to do to meet the specifications of the customer. The customer expectation, as related to a performance assessment, is that the analysis results present an adequate view (primarily from a legal standpoint) of the WIPP performance based on currently available data and information. RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (Pub. L. 94-580) and, as used herein, subsequent amendments (e.g., HSWA, Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984, Pub. L. 98616). RCRA establishes a procedure to track and control hazardous wastes from time of generation to disposal. Regulations in Title 40 CFR Parts 260-281 implement RCRA with respect to hazardous waste and hazardous waste treatment. RH-TRU remotely-handled transuranic waste, packaged TRU waste whose external surface dose rate exceeds 200 mrem per hour, but not greater than 1000 rem per hour, and thus must be handled remotely
RSSF Retrievable Surface Storage Facility for spent nuclear fuel and high-level waste proposed in 1972 by the AEC RWMC Radioactive Waste Management Complex, a nuclear waste storage facility for the DOE complex built in 1952 at Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL) SA Stipulated Agreement between the State of New Mexico and the DOE SAB Science Advisory Board, EPA SAR Safety Analysis Report SNF spent nuclear fuel, ". . . fuel that has been withdrawn from a nuclear reactor following irradiation, the constituent elements of which have not been separated by reprocessing" (NWPA, 1982)F26. Spent fuel can include intact and failed fuel assemblies, consolidated fuel rods, non-fuel components that are a part of a fuel assembly (such as neutron sources, instrumentation, and fuel channels). Although spent nuclear fuel has fissionable 235U, it contains too many radionuclides (primarily short-lived) that adsorb neutrons from the fission process for it to be usefully left in the reactor. Because of spent nuclear fuel's high value, some countries choose to recycle it (recycling becomes more attractive after the short-lived fission products have decayed away). It is also designated separately from other high-level and transuranic wastes in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's standard on disposal of radioactive wastes, Title 40 CFR Part 191. SNL Sandia National Laboratories, a multiprogram laboratory located in Albuquerque, NM, and Livermore, CA. SNL is operated and managed for the DOE by the Sandia Corporation. From 1949 until October 1993, Sandia Corporation was a wholly owned subsidiary of AT&T. Sandia Corporation is currently a wholly owned subsidiary of Lockheed Martin Corporation. SPDV Site and preliminary design validation phase performed by Bechtel National, Inc. SPM System Prioritization Methodology, developed by Sandia in 1994 and 1995 as an attempt to combine probabilistic performance assessment results with decision theory to help prioritize experimental work conducted for the WIPP SRP Savannah River Plant Laboratory Production Reactors Defense Waste Processing Facility, located southeast of Augusta, Georgia. A large volume of TRU waste produced and stored on site is destined for the WIPP. SWCF Sandia WIPP Central Files SWIFT II Sandia waste isolation flow and transport computer code initially developed in the late 1970s and updated in the mid 1980s
vii
SWRIC Southwest Research and Information Center, New Mexico special interest group TRU TRansUranic, all elements of the periodic table having atomic numbers greater than 92 TRUPACT-I Transuranic Package Transport, design I, designed to be a vented package in the same shape and size as standard shipping containers to facilitate shipment. The EEG objected to a vented container; so the package was completely redesigned (see TRUPACT-II) TRUPACT-II Transuranic Package Transport, design II, designed to be a pressurized hemispherical package for use on flatbed trucks
USGS U.S. Geological Survey, Department of Interior (DOI) WIPP Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, a full-scale research and development repository for transuranic wastes near Carlsbad, NM. WIPP was authorized in 1979 (Pub. L. 96-164) for the management, storage, and eventual disposal of waste generated by DOE defense programs that is contaminated with transuranic radionuclides and some RCRA hazardous chemicals. WPIO WIPP Project Integration Office, formed in 1989, forerunner of the Carlsbad Area Office (CAO) WPO WIPP Project office, forerunner of the Carlsbad Area Office (CAO)
viii
Milestones for Disposal of Radioactive Waste at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant
New Mexico has a long history of involvement in nuclear phenomena: In 1942, the Manhattan Engineering District (MED) of the Army Corps of Engineers selected New Mexico for assembling the scientists, engineers, and technicians to develop the first atomic bomb and what was to become Los Alamos National Laboratory and Sandia National Laboratories (SNL). In 1945, the first atomic explosion occurred in the desert near Alamogordo, New Mexico. In 1961, the U.S. detonated a device to explore nonmilitary uses of nuclear explosives in bedded salt near Carlsbad, New Mexico (Gnome Project).T8 Since 1973, New Mexico has been a potential disposal site for waste contaminated with transuranic (TRU) nuclear elements created during the production of nuclear weapons.T7 A brief description of this latter aspect is presented below followed by a detailed tabulation of milestones of the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP). reaffirmed that recommendation in 1961. Frustration at the lack of a formal waste policy at AEC caused the NAS to strongly criticize AEC disposal practices in 1966.N4, T7, T14 In 1970, the Board of Radioactive Waste Management of the NAS concluded that bedded salt was satisfactory and was the safest choice then available for nuclear waste disposal.T4, T16, T19 From 1961 through the early 1970s, Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) conducted radioactive-waste disposal experiments, most notably Project Salt Vault in an abandoned salt mine near Lyons, Kansas, from 1963 to 1967.T10,
T11
Early History of Nuclear Waste Disposal Related to the WIPP

Around 1944, the MED initially decided to bury solid nuclear waste in shallow trenches and augered holes at Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico, and in railroad cars, trenches, and underground caissons at the Hanford Reservation in Washington. Liquid nuclear waste was stored in ponds at both sites. The Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), formed in 1946F1 and the precursor to the Department of Energy (DOE), continued the practices of the MED. The AEC also constructed storage tanks in the late 1940s at Hanford and completed a nuclear waste storage complex at Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL) in 1952. From 1955 through the late 1960s, the AEC explored more permanent solutions for radioactive waste disposal in the United States, beginning with its request in 1955 that the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) examine the disposal issue.D2 In 1957, the NAS reported that while various options and disposal sites were feasible, disposal in salt beds was the most promising method to explore.T3 The NAS
In May 1969, the Rocky Flats Plant, built by the AEC in 1951 to machine plutonium for nuclear weapons, caught fire. Located only 26 km (16 mi) from Denver, Colorado, the fire attracted public attention. In its coverage, the press reported that the cleanup waste was eventually to be sent to Idaho.T15 Idaho state officials voiced concerns that it was becoming the nations nuclear waste disposal site by default. Hence, the AEC quickly moved to find a more suitable site and tentatively selected the Kansas mine as a repository in June 1970. At the same time, the AEC told Idaho Senator Church that the waste stored in Idaho would be removed by 1980 and sent to the salt mine.D7 Later in 1970, a conceptual design was completed for a nuclear waste repository in salt. Earlier in the year, in March 1970, the AEC had directed that thereafter TRU nuclear waste would be retrievably stored on the surface in Idaho and elsewhere rather than disposed of in trenches with low-level waste. In a related action, the AEC directed in 1971 that high-level waste (HLW) be solidified within five years, stored retrievably at all DOE facilities, and delivered to a federal repository within 10 years.D6 In the same year, a large number of drill holes and some solution mining were discovered at the proposed repository site near Lyons, Kansas.T15 Soon after, Congress directed the AEC to stop work on the Lyons project until safety was certified.
Although the Lyons project was not officially abandoned until 1975, the AEC announced plans in May 1972 for a Retrievable Surface Storage Facility (RSSF).D9 However, the recently formed U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and anti-nuclear groups claimed the RSSF to be de facto permanent disposal, which prompted the AEC to continue searching for a more suitable disposal site.T2128
federally funded projects. The EIS process exerted its influence during the 1970s as the AEC, which later became the Energy Research and Development Agency (ERDA) and then the DOE,** continued investigations on bedded salt in general and, specifically, the salt deposit in New Mexico as a satisfactory medium for hosting a repository. SNLs support of the EIS consisted of (among other things) detailed computer modeling of radioisotope escape through human intrusion and faulting, and the potential transport of radioisotopes through the aquifer overlying the WIPP to the Pecos River over a 250,000-year time frame (~10 half-lives of 239Pu), followed by dose calculations to humans. D1 During 1978 and early 1979, and without consultation with the State of New Mexico, the mission of the WIPP oscillated between including and excluding commercial spent nuclear fuel (SNF) and HLW in the repository, in addition to TRU wastes.D16, D17 Also, the new Carter administration required a fresh look at sites and options for nuclear waste disposal.D1820 Because some of the examined options created uncertainty about DOEs intentions within the state and were counter to the ideas of some Congressional members, Congress firmly established the purpose of the WIPP Project as a research and development facility for storage and disposal of TRU waste only (i.e., HLW and commercial and defense SNF were excluded). Congress also specifically exempted regulation by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and thus by default granted self-regulation to the DOE.*** A national advisory group, the WIPP Panel, which was set up under the Board of Radioactive Waste Management of the NAS,D11, T137 and an independent state-selected group, the
** The Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) was formed by the Atomic Energy Act of 1946.F1 The Energy Research and Development Agency (ERDA) and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) were formed by splitting the Atomic Energy Commission in the 1974 Energy Reorganization Act.F10 ERDA became the Department of Energy (DOE) in 1977.F16 ***
Early Studies at the WIPP
With the encouragement of local citizens and the tacit approval of Governor Bruce King, the AEC, ORNL, and the United States Geological Survey (USGS) recommended the extensive salt beds of southeastern New Mexico.T29 After an initial study of existing information, a potential site near the edge of the basin was identified in 1973. The first large-scale field test was conducted in March 1974 when ORNL drilled wells AEC-7 and AEC-8.T144 Also, in 1974, ORNL conducted the first scenario development and deterministic analysis for the proposed repository,T7 although the project was suspended two months later. In April 1975, SNL was chosen as the lead laboratory to (a) select and characterize,T34 (b) develop a conceptual design,T40 (c) draft an environmental impact statement (EIS),D1 and (d) initiate scientific studies for the repository.T39 After some site characterization, SNL recommended locating the WIPP site nearer the basin center where the stratigraphy was more predictable.T15, T33, T34 (A minor repositioning of the disposal panels also occurred in 1982.) The newly positioned site would become the current WIPP repository, near Carlsbad, New Mexico.D11 National policy issues, court settlements, and negotiated agreements had a strong influence on the amount and type of scientific data collected during the early phase of the WIPP Project. The passage by Congress of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969F3 established a broad national policy requiring an EIS on large
*
Because the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) Project spans more than 25 years, more events and milestones have occurred than can easily be covered in a few pages; thus, the description is selective to those issues that do not require extensive explanations. However, the large influence of national and regional policy on the type and extent of scientific studies conducted at the site is still evident.
Although regulation by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) would have been possible, the NRC had been established to regulate primarily commercial nuclear reactors and waste. Also, Congress did not favor NRC oversight of defense-related activities.
New Mexico Environmental Evaluation Group (EEG), were established on the initiative of the DOE to monitor its self-regulation. After the final EISD1 was published in 1980 and a record of decision published in January 1981,D24 the DOE proceeded to the preliminary design of the WIPP. Planning activities included a site and preliminary design validation (SPDV) phase, consisting of drilling two shafts in 1981 and 1982 and mining an experimental area. Full construction of the WIPP surface facility, an extensive underground experimental area, and one underground disposal panel began in 1983 after meeting the terms of the Consultation and Cooperation Agreement with the State of New Mexico and continued to completion over the next five years. Simultaneously with design and construction, SNL began fielding many in situ salt creep experiments to characterize the local disposal system.T42, T68, T77 Although, from a practical standpoint, the predicted and measured values of creep were close, the measured salt creep was nevertheless about three times greater than the predicted values noted in 1985,T81, T82 and so by 1989 an alternative mathematical expression for the creep phenomenon was developed.T99 In addition to developing a general understanding of selected natural phenomena as deemed prudent by SNL scientists (working with peers in waste management) and/or scientists on the WIPP Panel of the NAS,D11, T137 many of the geotechnical experiments conducted during the 1980s were undertaken to satisfy agreements with the State of New Mexico. Specifically, in 1981 in response to a lawsuit, a Stipulated Agreement and the Consultation and Cooperation Agreement mentioned earlier were negotiated that defined the relationship of the WIPP Project with the State of New Mexico and listed required geotechnical experiments to be conducted primarily by SNL.N8 These requirements and early drafts of the EPA nuclear waste disposal regulation in Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 191 (40 CFR 191) influenced the type of in situ experiments and activities initially planned at the WIPP. For example, when the WIPP-12 was deepened in 1981 as part of the negotiated settlement with the State of New Mexico, the project encountered a brine reservoir,T64 which resulted in moving the disposal region ~1800 m
to the south in 1982. By March 1983, SNL the USGS had examined many of geotechnical issues. For example, they explored and dismissed the possibility extensive dissolution disrupting repository.T69, T70
and the had of the
The decision by Congress in 1987 to characterize only Yucca Mountain, Nevada, for the first commercial SNF and HLW repositoryF35 caused the DOE to cancel many of the experiments being performed at the WIPP in support of a potential commercial repository elsewhere in bedded salt. The presence or absence of additional pockets of brine below the repository became of concern to the EEG in the early 1980s. Therefore, some studies were conducted to try to dismiss their presence.T74 Though the studies strongly suggested brine pockets were not present below the waste rooms in the anhydrite layer in which other brine pockets had been found, the studies were unable to show unequivocally that brine pockets did not occur in deeper anhydrite layers in the Castile Formation. Long-term slow seepage of brine trapped in the salt into the repository became a topic of great interest in 1988,N16 and the full Board of Radioactive Waste Management of the NAS examined the issue. Members of the NAS concluded that rapid salt creep combined with low permeability of the salt meant that the repository would be fairly well consolidated before much brine could enter the repository.T90 In preparation for the WIPPs planned opening by the end of the 1980s, SNL summarized past work and data, and performed numerous bounding calculations to support a Draft Supplemental EIS in 1989.D34, T48 The summary identified gas generationthe gas being generated through anoxic corrosion of waste containers and degradation of organic material as an important issue to study.T48 This issue had been identified in the mid 1970s,T47 but it was dismissed based on the assumption that high salt permeability values obtained from measurement in boreholes drilled prior to excavating the repository would allow any gas generated to dissipate without producing large pressures. Studying gas generation became an important purpose of proposed tests using actual TRU waste within the repository during a monitored pilot phase, after better in situ measurements of the salt permeability within the excavations in the
mid 1980s suggested values three orders of magnitude less than those measured in the mid 1970s.T90 However Congress stipulated in 1992 that the waste could be brought to the WIPP prior to demonstrating compliance only if the tests were scientifically necessary. Although the tests would have been potentially reassuring as a demonstration, the monitored pilot phase was not considered a scientific necessity. Therefore, in October 1993, the NAS recommendedT124 to eliminate the tests with actual waste at the WIPP (pilot phase) and to perform additional experiments in laboratories.D38 Without a pilot phase, the DOE decided to accelerate to the compliance phase for the WIPP and closed the in situ experimental area in October 1995.
Finally, in 1996, the EPA promulgated 40 CFR 194, a regulation to implement its 40 CFR 191 standard, which imposed several new interpretations, such as expanded human intrusion activities (specifically, potash mining), and requirements, such as peer review on waste characterization, engineered and natural barriers, and conceptual models.F53 Also in 1996, Congress removed one of the RCRA land disposal requirements (i.e., seeking a nomigration variance), which required calculations similar to those for 40 CFR 191.F54
Development of Methodology for Assessing Compliance of the WIPP

The history of assessing performance of a geologic disposal system began formally in 1976 when the ERDA funded two conferences to bring engineers and geologists together to explore the modeling of geologic disposal systems. By 1977, demands for permanent solutions to nuclear waste provided an impetus for President Gerald Ford to request the EPA to more vigorously pursue applicable standards for proposed waste repositories.D12, D13 During the EPAs development of 40 CFR 191 in the late 1970s and early 1980s, analysts at SNL were advocates for a thorough approach in evaluating modeling uncertainty (caused by various parameters in models of the exposure pathways and the uncertainty about the various pathways) as a way to gain insight about the behavior of a geologic waste repository. For example, an analysis that SNL had conducted for the EIS had relied heavily on mathematical modeling. SNLs position on this matter had developed indirectly from participation by a few Sandians on the 60-member team for the Nuclear Reactor Safety StudyF12 and Sandias direct involvement on several subsequent reactor accident studies for the NRC. In addition, SNLs advocacy for a probabilistic approach was influenced by its use of the approach in evaluating the reliability of weapons systems and also by the growing acceptance externally for evaluating technological risks. During this period, the term performance assessment (PA) was adopted internationally to
Compliance Setting for the WIPP

A major task of the WIPP Project, which was initiated about 1986, was developing evidence of compliance. The promulgation of 40 CFR 191 in 1985 established the primary probabilistic regulation with which the WIPP would have to comply. However, a legal ruling in 1984F30 and regulations in 1986 and 1987D31 resulted in defining as much as 60% of the waste destined for the WIPP as chemically hazardous. This legal ruling established another set of regulations that the WIPP also had to comply withthose for hazardous waste (40 CFR 260-270 and analogous New Mexico regulations) promulgated in response to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA).F13 In 1992, Congress defined the process by which the WIPP compliance would be evaluated, transferred ownership of the WIPP site to the DOE, and designated the EPA (rather than the DOE) as the regulator of the WIPP (Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Land Withdrawal ActF45). This act officially marked the transition from the construction and disposal-system-characterization phase to the compliance and testing phases. However, these latter phases had begun informally in 1985 and 1986 when the EPA issued 40 CFR 191F17 and its interpretation of mixed hazardous waste, and in 1989 when SNL first assessed performance using the EPA standard.T110, T111
describe the process of evaluating whether a geologic disposal system complied with the regulatory criteriacriteria that were probabilistic in the United States, thus making the assessment identical to probabilistic risk assessments (PRA) for nuclear reactors. Performance assessments of systems for the disposal of radioactive wastes nevertheless differed from most simulations used by federal agencies to explore policy options in two significant and related ways. First, in contrast with simulations for policy analysis, the EPA chose to use the PA results for the WIPP ultimately to test compliance of a real system with an existing environmental standard, not merely to gain insight into the behavior of the system. Second, the fact that part of the disposal system was geologic created several differences with some other types of risk assessments. For instance, the geologic portion of the disposal system introduced the necessity to characterize rather than design. Furthermore, geologic components of a waste disposal system are subject to natural processes over geologic time with no discrete failure points; hence, computerimplemented phenomenological models were needed in order to include geologic processes. In August 1986, SNL accepted DOEs formal request to take responsibility for showing compliance of the WIPP with 40 CFR 191.D29, D30 To gain proficiency and also to enable the project to better adapt efforts to collect information on important processes, SNL conducted four preliminary performance assessments from 1989 through 1992, each one building upon the other.T110, T111, T116, T117, T121, T125 The use of mathematical models and the general long-term flow path for radioisotope release was similar to the initial EIS, but the simulations were stochastic and numerous complexities were added, such as human intrusion causing radioisotope releases from drill cuttings. Hence, between January 1988 and December 1991, a significant effort was expended in developing a computational modeling system, CAMCON.T31, T91, T92, T115 Furthermore, vast numbers of records and documents were produced to ensure that the reasoning behind choices for data and models was traceable and repeatable. In October 1996, the performance assessment for the Compliance Certification Application (CCA) was submitted to the EPA showing compliance
with 40 CFR 191.T135, T136 While not responsible for evaluating compliance, the NAS also issued a report in October that noted the excellent features of the WIPP site for containing nuclear waste.T137, T138 These same conclusions were echoed in the 84,000-page second Supplemental EIS issued in November.D43 Between 1995 and 1997, the EPA and its contractors evaluated the CCA and supporting documentation.F55 The Conceptual Model Peer Review Group (formed in response to requirements in 40 CFR 194) concluded in early 1997 that 22 of the 24 conceptual models were adequate. The panel thought that, though conservative, the model for spallings (particulates carried to the surface by pressurized gas and/or brine during a hypothetical drilling intrusion in the repository at a future time) lacked sufficient realism; hence, the panel required the model to be redeveloped. The panel also thought the description of the behavior of the magnesium oxide (MgO) backfill needed improvement. During the next few months, more detailed calculations of the spalling phenomenon were run to demonstrate the conservatism of the current model and DOEs commitment to develop a more realistic model before the next certification in five years.T140 Also, additional information was provided on the behavior of the MgO backfill such that the Conceptual Model Peer Review Group concluded in an April meeting that these two modeling issues had been resolved. In addition, under the direction of the EPA, the PA calculations were rerun by SNL during the spring and summer, using EPAselected values and distributions for 26 parameters to help bolster EPA confidence in the results. Finally, in October 1997, the EPA published a draft rule proposing to approve the WIPP.F57, F58 In May 1998, the EPA issued certification.F59 In March 1999, Judge Penn lifted his injunction associated with a 1992 lawsuit by the State of New Mexico, and four days later the WIPP received its first shipment of non-RCRA waste.T142, T143
Summary
The opening of the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant on March 26, 1999, was the culmination of a regulatory assessment process that had taken 25
years. National policy issues, negotiated agreements, and court settlements during the first 15 years of the project had a strong influence on the amount and type of scientific data collected up to this point. Assessment activities before the mid 1980s were undertaken primarily (1) to satisfy needs for environmental impact statements, (2) to satisfy negotiated agreements with the State of New Mexico, or (3) to develop general understanding of selected natural phenomena associated with nuclear waste disposal.
In the last 10 years, federal compliance policy and actual regulations were sketched out, and continued to evolve until 1996. During this period, stochastic simulations were introduced as a tool for the assessment of the WIPPs performance, and four preliminary performance assessments, one compliance performance assessment, and one verification performance assessment were performed.
Detailed Tabulation of WIPP Milestones

In the following tabulation of WIPP milestones, the history of the WIPP is divided into four main categories. One category highlights technical milestones, and three categories highlight the major political events that have influenced the WIPP Project, as briefly summarized above. Noteworthy events from all four categories are also shown schematically. The tabulation also indicates two temporal categories of the WIPP Projectone used officially by the DOE for the project as a whole and one used informally by SNL to describe its various activities.
Milestones for Disposal of Radioactive Waste in the United States

Time Line Noteworthy Events Technical Milestones Related to the WIPP U.S. President and DOE: Directives and Decisions
1942 - Manhattan Engineering District (MED) Corps of Engineers selects site for LANL to develop a nuclear bomb.
1942
1943
1944
1945 1946
;;; ;;;
1942 LANL site chosen 1943 MED's 1st waste decision 1945 Atomic test in NM
Federal Legislation, Judicial Decisions, and Regulatory Requirements Related to Nuclear Waste Disposal
Legal Challenges and New Mexico, National, and World Issues

Miles Admin.
1942 - All types of waste initially dumped in canyons at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL). T1 1943 - Plutonium operations commence and disposal of nuclear waste begins on site at Oak Ridge National Lab (ORNL) in trenches and Clinch River. T1 Water has saturated the bottoms of some trenches, and migration of radioisotopes has been observed. 1944 - Disposal of nuclear waste begins on site at LANL (using trenches, ponds, augered holes) and Hanford Reservation (using railroad cars, trenches, ponds, tanks, underground caissons). T2 1945 - Atomic bomb exploded at Trinity Site near Alamogordo, NM.
Roosevelt Administration
1946 - Atomic Energy Act (AEA) of 1946 F1: - creates AEC - establishes government monopoly on atomic weapons and nuclear material
1943 - MED's earliest decision on managing waste: store high-level waste (HLW) as liquids in tanks and bury other waste (solid or liquid) in trenches. D1
Dempsey Administration
1946 - Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) Chairman: Lilienthal (Director of Tennessee Valley Authority) 1949 - Truman asks AT&T to manage the recently formed Sandia Laboratory. 1952 - Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Lab (INEEL) completes Radioactive Waste Management Complex (RWMC) for storing and burying waste; migration of radioisotopes downward into the alluvium has been observed. 1953 - Savannah River Plant (SRP) begins waste storage and disposal on site at "Old Burial Ground"; water in trenches from precipitation has caused migration of radionuclides. 1954 - Rocky Flats Plant near Denver, CO, begins shipping transuranic (TRU) waste to INEEL for disposal at RWMC. 1953 - AEC Chairman: Strauss
Mabry Admin.
Truman Administration
8
TRI-6342-6212-0
1949 1951 1952
Mechem Administration
1953
Eisenhower Administration
1954 - AEA of 1954 F2 seeks peaceful uses of atomic energy, thus allows regulated private atomic energy development.
1955 1957
1957 NAS recommends exploring waste disposal in salt beds
1955 - AEC asks National Academy of Sciences (NAS) to examine issue of permanent disposal of radioactive wastes. D2 1957 - NAS recommends radioisotope waste disposal in salt as most promising method. T3 ORNL begins research in salt (1957-61). T4 May: Rocky Flats Plant catches fire but kept secret. T5 1959 - NAS commission on oceanography reports on coastal disposal of low-level radioactive waste. T6 1957 - Plowshare program starts to look at peaceful uses of nuclear explosives. D3
Simms Admin. Mechem Admin.
1959
Burroughs Admin.
1960
1961
1961 Gnome test
1962
;;;; ;;;;
1961 - Dec: NAS reaffirms use of New Mexico salt beds for disposal. T7 US Geological Survey (USGS) evaluates stratigraphy and AEC mines into Salado Fm. at Gnome site near Carlsbad, NM, for Gnome test as part of Plowshare program. T8 1962 - USGS reports on domestic salt deposits suitable for waste disposal; the Permian Basin in parts of NM, KS, TX, and OK is one area identified. T9 1963 - ORNL begins Project Salt Vault, a large-scale field test in which irradiated fuel elements and electric heaters are placed in an existing salt mine at Lyons, KS; up to 1967, the tests primarily study near-field effects. T10, T11 INEEL adopts oxidation of liquid HLW to form solid grains ("calcine") for storing HLW. T12, T13
1961 - AEC Chairman: Seaborg (co-discoverer of Pu)
Mechem Admin.
Kennedy Administration
Bolack Admin.
1963
1963 ORNL Project Salt Vault
Campbell Administration
Johnson Administration
1965 1966
1965 - Savannah River Plant (SRP) begins disposing TRU waste in trenches on site. 1966 - NAS reaffirms use of salt beds for disposal and strongly criticizes current disposal practices. T7, T14, T15
1966 - Jan: B52 collides with refueling tanker at 30,500 ft.; three nuclear weapons crash into Spanish soil; fourth weapon parachutes into ocean. N1, N2 Question raised as to how to define plutonium-contaminated soil (TRU waste). AEC later defined TRU waste in 1970.
1967 1968
1968 - Committee on Radioactive Waste Management established by NAS, later permanent "Board" (BRWM); T14, T16 first task is to reevaluate the use of bedded salt.
1968 - AEC asks NAS to revisit the issue of nuclear waste disposal. D4 At request of Congress, General Accounting Office (GAO) audits AEC waste management practices and finds faults with records and management. AEC forms task force to address criticisms. D5 1969 - Dec: Congress passes National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) F3: - requires federal agencies to consider environmental consequences of any major action through environmental impact statement (EIS) - first US environmental law to be applied to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) Public comment provides avenue for groups to push for stringent regulations for nuclear facilities. 1970 - Congress forms Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and transfers to it research, monitoring, standard setting, and enforcement activities related to environment. F4, F5 AEC conservatively bounds TRU waste as waste contaminated with transuranic radioisotopes with activity greater than 10 nCi/g. F6
9
1969
1969 Congress passes National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 1969 Rocky Flats Plant catches fire
1969 - May: Rocky Flats Plant catches fire and cleanup waste sent to Idaho for disposal at RWMC; event focuses public attention on AEC nuclear waste problems. T17 International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) forms advisory committee to categorize nuclear waste; Alpha-contaminated waste one category defined. T18
Cargo Administration
Nixon Administration
1970
1970 NAS concludes bedded salt disposal safest choice now available 1970 Lyons site selected for geologic repository 1970 Congress forms EPA 1970 AEC begins storing TRU waste above ground
1970 - Conceptual design completed for HLW repository in salt. Nov: BRWM of NAS issues report concluding bedded salt satisfactory and safest choice now available for nuclear waste disposal. T19
1970 - Mar: AEC Chairman: Schlesinger. AEC directs TRU waste be stored retrievably at all DOE facilities rather than disposed with low-level waste. D6 Jun: AEC tells Sen. Church that the waste stored at INEEL will be removed by 1980 and sent to salt mine. D7 AEC tentatively selects mine in Lyons, KS, as repository. D8 1971 - AEC states all commercially generated HLW must be solidified within 5 yr and delivered to a federal repository within10 yr. D6
TRI-6342-6213-0
1971
King Admin.
1971 - Many drill holes and some solution mining discovered at Lyons, KS. T15 USGS tests permeability of strata around Gnome site (Plowshare program) for closure studies by AEC. T20
1971 - Congress directs AEC to stop Lyons project until safety is certified. Appeals court requires AEC to look at all environmental impacts in EIS. F7
1971 - Attorney General (AG): Norvell. NM Environmental Improvement Act N3 creates state environmental agency.

Time Line Noteworthy Events Technical Milestones Related to the WIPP U.S. President and DOE: Directives and Decisions
1972 - May: AEC abandons Lyons project. AEC announces plans for Retrievable Surface Storage Facility (RSSF) for radioactive wastes. D9 AEC Chairman asks for Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) of core meltdown. 1973 - Nationwide search for suitable salt site resumed.T21,T22,T23,T24,T25,T26,T27,T28,T29 AEC, USGS, and ORNL recommend southeastern NM (lack of boreholes 2 miles from site important selection criterion but relaxed to 1 mile in 1975). 1973 - AEC Chairman: D.L. Ray
1972 - EPA and anti-nuclear groups claim RSSF de facto permanent disposal in RSSF EIS. F8, F9
1972
1972 Lyons site judged unacceptable
LYONS
Nixon Administration
1973
1973 Carlsbad location chosen
1973 - With tacit approval of Gov. King, local political leaders and potash mine operators invite AEC to southeastern NM. (This strong local and political support from southeastern NM facilitates the WIPP process.) N4 Oct: Arab oil embargo against U.S. 1974 - Oct: Energy Reorganization Act F10 splits AEC into Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and Energy Research and Development Agency (ERDA) effective January 1975. 1974 - Gov. King establishes Governor's Technical Excellence Committee; creates WIPP oversight subcommittee.
King Administration
1974
1974 Draft of 1st PRA on nuclear reactors
Regional Characterization (SNL Phases)
1974 ORNL conducts scenario development and consequence analysis of WIPP
1974 - Mar: ORNL begins field investigations for the Bedded Salt Pilot Plant (BSPP) by drilling AEC-7 and AEC-8. T30, T31 Aug: Draft of first major Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) published on two reactors by 60 member team for Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC); method uses fault trees to synthesize probability of total system failure. T32 Oct: ORNL conducts first scenario development and deterministic analysis for WIPP. T7 Probability of meteorite impact, probability of fault (and volcanism), and exploratory drilling intersecting disposal area estimated. 1975 - Mar: Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) receives funding and starts four tasks: selecting site and characterizing, producing conceptual design, drafting EIS, initiating scientific studies. May: ERDA-6 drilled at NW corner of original ORNL site; encounters deformed salt beds and hits brine and H2S much deeper. T33 SNL recommends relocation and project moves site ~11 km (7 mi) toward center of Delaware Basin to avoid deformed salt beds as indicated by oil well logs. T15, T34 SNL begins screening grouts to use for plugging boreholes. T35 1976 - SNL begins site characterization and engineering design program at new site; various natural backfills such as apatite or salt bentonite considered for use in repository. T36 Parsons, Brinckerhoff, Quade, and Douglas, Inc. describe hypothetical HLW repository in bedded salt for Office of Nuclear Waste Isolation of ERDA. T37 Apr: ERDA-9 drilled into Castile Formation near center of new site. Laboratory tests on TRU waste behavior and HLW packages initiated. T38, T39
1974 - AEC promises Idaho that wastes will be shipped in the 1980s. May: WIPP work suspended until 1975 because AEC wishes to emphasize RSSF and AEC Chairman Ray will not withdraw land from oil exploration because of oil embargo. D10
Siting Phase (DOE Phases)
10
1975 1976
TRI-6342-6214-0
1975 WIPP moved toward basin center
1975 - Jan: ERDA asks SNL, located in NM, to oversee investigations rather than ORNL and suggests an opening date of 1982. ERDA removes WIPP from commercial repository program.
1975 - NRC promulgates "As Low As Reasonably Achievable" (ALARA) policy for limiting radiation exposure. F11 Oct: NRC final PRA for nuclear reactors. F12
1975 - AG: Anaya.
Ford Administration
Apodaca Administration
1976 ERDA-9 drilled at center of WIPP site
1976 Ford orders demonstration of nuclear waste disposal 1976 Bishop's Lodge Conference to explore PRA for geologic disposal
1976 - Jan: Project is officially named the "Waste Isolation Pilot Plant." D11 Oct: Ford orders major expansion of ERDA program to demonstrate permanent disposal for nuclear waste by 1985 and orders EPA to develop generally applicable standards. D12, D13 ERDA funds conference on modeling of geologic disposal systems to bring engineers and geologists together to explore predicting geological features, events, and processes (FEPs). D14
1976 - Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) F13 seeks to reduce or eliminate hazardous waste generation to minimize present and future threat to human health and environment. Dec: EPA announces intent to develop radiation protection standards for HLW disposal. F10 NRC funds panel of earth scientists to identify events and processes that could disrupt a generic repository. F14
1977 DOE created
1977
1977 WIPP conceptual design with two levels
1977 - Jun: SNL issues conceptual design report of WIPP repository with two levels. T40 WIPP conceptual design report issued. T40 SNL plugs ERDA-10 to test plugging boreholes in salt. T41, T42 INEEL begins risk analysis of alternatives for TRU waste stored and buried at RWMC over next 4 yr. T43 Los Alamos, Savannah River, and Hanford begin similar studies as well. Human intrusion event significant contributor to consequences in these studies. 1978 - SNL begins design of the Transuranic Package Transport, design I (TRUPACT-I) using standard cargo box concept. T44, T45, T46 Jan: Bechtel National starts as WIPP Architect/Engineer (A/E). Jun: Westinghouse Electric Corp. starts as Technical Support Contractor. SNL raises concern about gas generation and contracts with Los Alamos to do laboratory tests. T47 In response to DOE request to review scientific aspects of WIPP Project, WIPP Panel of BRWM of NAS holds first meeting. T30 Aug: SNL completes geologic characterization report T34 supporting Draft EIS on WIPP; transmissivity values of Culebra from four wells are available. T48 Hydrologic and radioisotope transport modeling for EIS is primarily regional and extends for 250,000 yr (10 half lives of 239Pu) using large, 3-D Swift flow model. T49 NRC funds SNL to work on probabilistic PA and apply to hypothetical bedded salt repository. T50, T51 Nov: Lab studies focus on titanium alloys for HLW canisters. T42 1979 - To develop necessary predictive capability, T52 SNL begins 3-yr preliminary test programs on thermal/structural effects in nearby potash mine, T53 and Avery Island, Louisiana, dome salt. T54, T55 Consolidation of crushed salt studied. T42 First in situ permeability measurement of Salado Formation salt from AEC-7 well (values 1000 times larger than found when measured within repository in 1988) T56; Bechtel identifies seven potential horizons for WIPP. SNL completes development of scenarios for release from WIPP (part of EIS process). T57 Laboratory measurements made of permeability on ERDA-9 core. T42 Apr: Draft EIS on WIPP published. T49 As part of EIS process, SNL completes development of scenarios for release of radioisotopes from WIPP (method abandons fault trees and uses simple event trees). T57, T58 Three major classes of scenarios identified (connection between Culebra [above repository] and Bell Canyon [below repository] aquifers, U-tube connection to Culebra, and stagnant pool connection to Culebra) plus drilling intrusion. (Later U-tube split into catastrophic connection and standard U-tube connection.) T49 Probabilities of scenarios assigned based on qualitative reasoned arguments. Jul: Preliminary Title I design of WIPP completed.
1977 - DOE Sec: Schlesinger. Apr: Carter announces plan to defer indefinitely reprocessing of commercial spent nuclear fuel (SNF). D15 Nov: Although role of NRC at WIPP unclear, DOE tells NRC it plans to seek license to build and operate WIPP based on policy from Carter administration. (WIPP returns to commercial waste repository program.)
1977 - Oct: DOE Organization Act F15 creates cabinet-level Department of Energy (DOE) from ERDA. Feb: In response to Ford's directive, EPA conducts first public workshop to understand public concerns and technical issues of waste disposal. F16, F17 Apr: Second meeting of NRC panel of earth scientists occurs to identify events and process. F14
1977 - NM Hazardous Waste Act N5 seeks to maintain environmental quality.
Apodaca Administration
1978
1978 Oversight by WIPP panel of NAS and NM EEG begins
Regional Characterization (SNL Phases)
1978 SNL publishes supporting characterization documents for EIS 1978 SNL adapts PRA for reactors to nuclear waste repositories 1978 SNL tests gas generation potential of TRU waste
1978 - DOE suggests opening date of 1985. D16 DOE Deputy Sec. Jerry O'Leary promises NM Congressional delegation "if NM did not wish to have the WIPP, then it could veto the plan." Both Comptroller Gen. and DOE Gen. Counsel state O'Leary powerless to grant "state veto." D17 DOE conducts local hearings on proposed WIPP. Oct: Deutch (Massachusetts Institute of Technology [MIT] chemistry professor) report written for DOE recommends (1) disposing TRU waste at WIPP without planning for retrieval and (2) demonstrating SNF, HLW, and TRU disposal at WIPP. D18, D19 DOE Deputy Sec. J. O'Leary presses on with second recommendation until 1979 enabling law for WIPP as a way to satisfy California law banning nuclear power plants until SNF disposal demonstrated. D10
1978 - Jan: EPA announces public forum to develop protection criteria for radioactive wastes. F16 Nov: EPA publishes "Criteria for Radioactive Wastes" as guidance for federal agencies and seeks comments. F18
1978 - DOE contracts with NM to establish Environmental Evaluation Group (EEG) to provide a full-time, independent assessment of WIPP and oversee environment, public health and safety. Although DOEfunded, EEG is initially made a part of Environmental Improvement Division of the NM Health & Environment Department. The general understanding is neither DOE nor NM would attempt to bias or interfere in EEG's technical conclusions. EEG becomes second permanent outside oversight group set up by DOE (first was NAS WIPP Panel of BRWM). NM House almost passes ballot proposal for constitutional amendment to keep nuclear waste from NM.
Carter Administration
11
1979
TRI-6342-6215-0
1979 Congress defines mission of WIPP and passes WIPP bill for TRU waste only 1979 Draft EIS on WIPP has option for commercial SNF and conducts transport analysis of Pu out to 250,000 yr
1979 - Mar: President forms Interagency Review Group (IRG), in response to Deutch report to recommend type of nuclear waste disposal, and recommends disposal of SNF, HLW, and TRU in mined geologic repositories in final report. D20 Report also suggests making WIPP candidate for commercial SNF repository. Apr: DOE defines project as a combination military/commercial repository in Draft EIS. D16, D21 Based on salt permeability tests in AEC-7 well, DOE cancels all gas generation and some backfill experiments. DOE buys oil and gas leases for $19 million.
1979 - May: House Armed Services Committee cuts WIPP funding in response to O'Leary's (DOE's) expansion of the project to a repository for commercial SNF and thus requiring NRC licensing (even if for demonstration only). Dec: Congress defines mission F19 of WIPP: - sets up WIPP as a research and development facility for disposal of only TRU radioactive waste from DOE facilities - exempts WIPP from NRC licensing - requires DOE to sign a "Consultation & Cooperation" (C&C) Agreement with NM. EPA defines TRU waste as waste with activity greater than 100 nCi/g. F20
1979 - AG: Bingaman. Legislature establishes (1) Governor's Radioactive Waste Consultation Task Force to negotiate with DOE and (2) Legislative Radioactive and Hazardous Materials Committee to review task force. N6
King Administration

Time Line Noteworthy Events Technical Milestones Related to the WIPP
1980 - Westinghouse completes first Safety Analysis Report (SAR). T59 General Atomic Technologies started as A/E for TRUPACT-I (used SNL basic concept but changed details). SNL asked to analyze and test TRUPACT-I when built.
U.S. President and DOE: Directives and Decisions

1980 - Feb: Carter orders SNF reprocessing to stop. D22 Mar: Carter rescinds 1980 funds for WIPP and announces interim strategy to set aside money for possible future waste disposal projects at WIPP. Oct: DOE issues final EIS eliminating SNF and HLW disposal and thereby reinstates WIPP mission defined by Congress in 1979. D1 Nov: DOE applies to Department of Interior (DOI) for administrative withdrawal of land for Site and Preliminary Design Validation (SPDV) experiments at WIPP. D23
1980 - Jul: House Armed Services Committee disagrees with Carter proposal; therefore, rescinded funds are returned to WIPP mid-year.

1980 - NM and DOE begin negotiations on C&C Agreement to define procedures and process of cooperation.
1980
1980 Final EIS on WIPP
Carter Administration
1981
1981 First shaft drilled
yyy ;;;
1981 SNL reports on PA of hypothetical salt site
Shaft
1981 Stipulated agreement between DOE and New Mexico signed
yyyyy ;;;;; yyyyy ;;;;; yy ;;

Repository in salt
1981 - Tests begun in nearby potash mine, Mississippi Chemical Mine Co., to evaluate corrosion of potential waste canisters and overpack alloys. T60 May: WIPP begins augering for first shaft, which ushers in SPDV phase of WIPP. Fenix & Scisson, SPDV construction contractor, begins augering first shaft (this exploratory shaft later called construction and salt handling shaft and then salt handling shaft). T61, T62 Jun: Drilling of second 3.6 m shaft begins (this waste shaft initially called ventilation shaft). Jul: Drilling on first shaft begins. Stipulated Agreement (SA) between New Mexico and DOE describes disruptive scenarios (e.g., breccia pipe, salt dissolution, and salt deformation) that are to be dismissed through further site characterization. T63 Oct: First 3.6 m shaft completed. Nov: Project strikes pressured brine reservoir T64 while deepening WIPP-12 north of the repository (as part of Stipulated Agreement [SA]). Extensive tests and analysis continue on WIPP-12 through 1983. T48 Three tests set up in nearby Mississippi chemical potash mine to evaluate fluid migration in salt formations. T60 Dec: Drilling of second shaft begins. Draft of final report to NRC on performance assessment (PA) of hypothetical bedded salt repository readily available T51, T65 uses a set of loosely connected codes, precursors to SWIFT II T65 (fluid flow code), and NEFTRAN T66 (network transport code). IAEA recommends procedure for PA and potential list of events and processes for scenarios. T67
1981 - Jan: DOE publishes Record of Decision to proceed with SPDV phase. D24 Feb: After reviewing preliminary design, DOE okays detailed (Title II D25) design phase. DOE Sec: Edwards. Jun: DOE WIPP Project Mgr. McGough rekindles disagreements between DOE and New Mexico by stating HLW could be placed by 1983 and remain during the operating phase of WIPP. Sep: After reviewing preliminary design, DOE okays detailed design phase. D25
Disposal System Characterization
1981 - Feb: NRC promulgates licensing procedures for SNF and HLW disposal in geologic repositories. F21 District Court denies Citizens for Alternatives to Radioactive Dumping (CARD) motion for a preliminary injunction against constructing WIPP. Draft (but not final) Nuclear Waste Policy Act (NWPA) defines TRU waste as waste contaminated with transuranic radioisotopes with half-life greater than 20 yr and activity greater than 100 nCi/g. F22 Mar: Developing generic disposal criteria for radioactive wastes is difficult, thus EPA starts developing standards for each waste type. F23
1981 - Jan: In response to Record of Decision DOE proceeds with SPDV: Mar: CARD files lawsuit and asks for preliminary injunction. N7 May: NM AG sues DOE and DOI alleging violations of federal and state laws. N8 Jul: Southwest Research and Information Center (SWRIC) files lawsuit N9 and begins strategy of filing numerous interrogatories to which DOE must respond. In response to lawsuits, N8 DOE Sec. Edwards visits NM, talks to Gov. King, and accedes in a Stipulated Agreement (SA) to demands for (1) geotechnical experiments, (2) SNL report on 17 technical issues (e.g., disruptive scenarios such as breccia pipe, salt dissolution, and salt deformation that are to be examined by SNL), (3) state and public review of WIPP changes, and (4) creation of a state/federal task force to oversee transportation issues (e.g., emergency response and highway upgrades). C&C Agreement attached as Appendix A, "Working Agreement" as Appendix B. N8 U.S. Dist. Judge Burciaga stays lawsuit in accordance with SA. Coalition for Direct Action at WIPP demonstrates against construction. EEG recommends relocating TRU storage away from WIPP-12.
King Administration
SPDV
12
TRI-6342-6216-0
Reagan Administration
1982
1982 USGS dismisses concerns about breccia pipes
SPDV
1982 Disposal area moved to south of shafts
1982 - Mar: Second 1.8 m shaft completed (~80 m [270 ft] of drilling fluid left in the shaft). Westinghouse suggests eliminating fourth shaft along with other cost saving measures. T61, T62 May: Repository level selected. Jun: Army Corps of Engineers assumes responsibility for all phases of construction management. Jul: Drilling of DOE-1 started and completed to top of Anhydrite I in Castile Fm. Oct: Underground excavation started to connect the two shafts. Nov: Excavations connect the two existing shafts. Following evaluation of WIPP-12, TRU disposal area moved ~1800 m (6000 ft) south (experimental area left in original area). Schedule calls for opening WIPP in April 1989. First shaft sealing concepts presented. SNL publishes report outlining in situ tests to perform in next several years. T68 Dec: SNL completes interim report on dissolution of evaporites in and around the Delaware Basin T69 (part of SA). USGS completes breccia pipe report (part of SA) and dismisses concerns. T70 1983 - DOE Sec: Hodel. Mar: DOE gives SPDV reports to NM and allows 60-day comment period. D26 In response to questions by EEG, DOE concludes draft 40 CFR 191 applies to disposal phase but not test phase of WIPP. May: ORNL complex admits releasing 2 x 106 lb of Hg from Y-12 plant between 1950 and 1977. Revelation prompts Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and Legal Environmental Assistance Foundation (LEAF) to sue DOE. D27 Jul: DOE announces decision to proceed with construction. D28 Sep: DOE sets October 1988 as WIPP opening date.
1982 - Courts decline to relieve DOE from responding to numerous SWRIC interrogatories. Mar: DOI approves DOE's application for administrative withdrawal of 36 x 106 m2 (8960 acres) for conducting SPDV experiments for 8 yr. F24 Dec: NWPA passes F25: - sets up trust fund, funded by utilities, to pay for SNF and HLW repository - requires NRC licensing of repository - sets acceptable risk of 1000 deaths/ 10,000 yr - states SNF and HLW from DOE facilities will go to repository unless President objects - suggests DOE build Monitored Retrievable Storage (MRS) Facility EPA publishes working draft 20 of environmental standards for radioactive waste management as proposed 40 CFR 191. F26
1982 - Dec: Supplemental SA signed (1) committing DOE to seek funds for upgrading highways in NM, (2) committing DOE to more geotechnical studies, and (3) making DOE liable for WIPP-related accidents. N10
King Administration
1983
1983 Full construction begins
Full Construction Phase
1983 - Mar: SNL, USGS, and contractors complete most reports required by SA (e.g., USGS reports Culebra transmissivity at 20 locations T48, T71; SNL reports on groundwater flow in Rustler Fm. T72 and deformation of evaporites near WIPP T73; technical support contractor, Westinghouse, reports on brine reservoirs in the Castile Fm. T64). Excavation of experimental rooms begins, and Bechtel begins final (Title III) design. Apr: WIPP Panel NAS tours WIPP underground to examine SPDV tests. T74 May: Repository level selected. Oct: Drilling of pilot hole for third shaft begins (exhaust shaft) and is completed in December. T61, T62 Aug: Deepening of Cabin Baby started and completed to Bell Canyon Fm.; geophysical logs run and deep sandstones in Bell Canyon hydrologically tested. T75, T76
1983 - Congress allocates $5.8 M for road improvement in NM. Jan - Sep: EPA's Science Advisory Board (SAB) holds public meetings on 40 CFR 191. Jun: DOI approves land withdrawal for 8 yr for a 36 x 106 m2 area to construct WIPP. F27 NRC promulgates technical criteria for waste disposal in geologic repositories and includes by reference the yet-to-be promulgated EPA standard on waste disposal. F28
1983 - AG: Bardacke. May: After reviewing results from SPDV program, EEG concludes that "...the Los Medaos site has been characterized in sufficient detail to warrant confidence in the validation of the site for permanent emplacement of approximately 6 million ft3 (1.75 x 105 m3) of defense TRU waste," but also recommends additional studies to resolve outstanding geotechnical issues such as evaluation of potential for brine reservoirs. N11 Aug: EEG issues report and Governor holds press conference on concern about potentially explosive hydrogen gas in TRUPACT-I. N12 Sep: CARD and Sierra Club allege that DOE and EEG are collaborating to deceive NM about safety of WIPP; they also insist on NRC licensing of WIPP.
13
1984
TRI-6342-6217-0
Anaya Administration
1984 SNL begins fielding many underground experiments
1984 - Feb: Raised bore reaming completed of third shaft. Apr: As rooms excavated, SNL begins many thermal/structural and waste package (e.g., defense HLW) field tests defined in 1982, ushering in the system characterization phase of project. T42, T68, T77 Pumping tests at DOE-1 suggest fracture flow in Culebra. First in situ gas flow measurement conducted around underground drift. T78 Jun: Second shaft enlarged from 1.8 m to 6 m. T61, T62 Aug: SNL drills and tests DOE-2. T79 General Atomic Technologies completes one container; SNL sends it to ORNL test facility because container exceeds SNL weight limit for 30 ft drop and puncture test, etc., required in 10 CFR 71 T80; container passes tests.
1984 - Mar: Manager of Albuquerque Operations Office (AL) moves WIPP Project Office (WPO) to Carlsbad.
1984 - Feb: EPA SAB endorses probabilistic approach of 40 CFR 191 but states performance criteria too restrictive and recommends several changes. F29 Apr: LEAF vs. Hodel F30 requires DOE to apply both the technical and procedural requirements of RCRA to DOE facilities even though AEA exempted DOE from many environment and human health laws. Nov: Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) F31 to RCRA ban land disposal of hazardous waste without treatment unless disposal site and generator demonstrate "no migration" of constituents for as long as waste remains hazardous.
1984 - Nov: First modification to C&C Agreement limiting remote-handled (RH) TRU waste amount to 5.1 x 106 Ci.

1985 - Jan: Blasting of third shaft to final 4.6 m diameter completed. Excavation begins for circular room H. SNL reports on discrepancy between measured and predicted salt creep first hinted at in south drift in 1982. T81, T82 General Atomic Technologies disassembles TRUPACT-I and cuts in half; half with door rebuilt; while rebuilding, puncture damage replicated to match damage in original TRUPACT-I. With the definition of a 5-km boundary to the disposal system in 40 CFR 191, project begins to focus more on near-field hydrologic modeling rather than regional modeling. Apr & Oct: SNL turns on heat for simulated defense high-level waste (DHLW) canister experiments. 1986 - Feb: Pillar creep test begins in circular room H. Heated (accelerated) tests of CH-TRU and RH-TRU container behavior start. TRUPACT-I passes firetest at SNL. T83, T84 First in situ injected brine flow measurement to determine permeability around drifts. T42 Oct: In preparation for operations, Westinghouse awarded Management & Operation (M&O) contract. Army Corps of Engineers relieved of construction management duties. 1987 - SNL finds possibility of a pressurized brine reservoir below the TRU disposal area cannot be ruled out. T74, T76 Lack of double containment in TRUPACT-I becomes major issue. T85, T86 Wet salt compaction tests concluded, constitutive equation for consolidation developed, and shaft consolidation modeled (effective consolidation predicted in < 100 yr). T42 Mar: SNL finds that porous-media flow assumption adequately models flow in Culebra at H-3 but that transport is best modeled as dual porosity media T87 (though roughly approximated as equivalent porous media). T76, T88, T89 Modeling with variable brine densities suggests Culebra acting as leaky confined aquifer; T87 subsequent models ignored suggestion until 1997. Also model suggests highly transmissive zone in the Culebra to the south of H-11 and DOE-1. T87 Oct: Nuclear Packaging becomes A/E for the Transuranic Package Transport, design II (TRUPACT-II); SNL again selected as DOE technical advisor.

1985 - DOE Sec: Harrington. President approves the three repository candidates as recommended by DOE for SNF and HLW. President concurs with DOE recommendation that defense SNF and HLW be disposed of in commercial repository. Nov: DOE attempts to define "by-product material" to include mixed waste and thus exclude EPA regulation.
1985 - Office of Technology Assessment (OTA), an agency of Congress, concludes no insurmountable technical obstacles for geologic repositories. F32 Sep: EPA promulgates 40 CFR 191 for disposal of SNF, HLW, and TRU in a geologic repository F17: - probabilistic criteria indirectly based on population health risk - requests inclusion of all uncertainty In 40 CFR 191, EPA defines TRU waste as waste with activity greater than 100 nCi/g and half-life greater than 20 yr. Promulgation begins the transition of the WIPP to compliance phase.

1985 - Jan: NM receives EPA authorization to regulate hazardous wastes. N13 Feb: Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) sues EPA to issue 40 CFR 191 as mandated in NWPA of 1982. N14 EEG notifies DOE that the single-shelled, vented rectangular transportation container for TRU waste, TRUPACT-1, is unacceptable for NM. N15
1985
1985 EPA promulgates 40 CFR 191
1985 SNL reports on discrepancy in creep first hinted at in 1982
Anaya Administration
1986
1986 EPA states mixed waste subject to RCRA (potentially ~60% of WIPP waste)
1986 - Aug: DOE asks SNL to assess performance of WIPP against 40 CFR 191 criteria (Performance Assessment [PA]). D29 SNL accepts PA task. D30
1986 - EPA states that mixed waste (radioactive waste also meeting hazardous waste definition) is subject to RCRA and hazardous waste regulations. F33 NRC promulgates probabilistic safety goals for nuclear reactors that are similar to 40 CFR 191. F34
1986 - Mar: NRDC and others sue EPA over groundwater and individual protection standards in 40 CFR 191.
Compliance Evaluation
14
1987
TRI-6342-6218-0
1987 Brine pockets cannot be dismissed
1987 - May: DOE redefines "by-product material" to exclude everything except radionuclides, and thereby TRU waste is subject to RCRA (and HSWA). D31 Jul: Agreement between Department of Labor (DOL) and DOE on mine inspections. D32 Oct: DOE selects Nuclear Packaging conceptual design for TRUPACT-II.
1987 - Jul: In response to legal challenges to individual and groundwater protection requirements in subpart B, Court of Appeals for first Circuit in Boston vacates and remands all of 40 CFR 191 to EPA. F34 Sep: Court reinstates Subpart A of 40 CFR 191 in response to EPA request. Dec: Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments Act (NWPAA) F35 selects Yucca Mt., NV, to undergo site characterization for potential SNF and HLW disposal; because bedded salt not being considered, SNF and HLW tests at WIPP unnecessary.
1987 - AG: Stratton. Anticipating conflicts between radioactive and hazardous waste regulations, NM legislature exempts WIPP from hazardous waste regulations. Aug: second modification to C&C Agreement committing DOE to comply with all applicable laws and regulations, and discourage WIPP compliance by way of grandfathering, variance, exemption, or waiver; and use 40 CFR 191 as first issued for evaluating WIPP compliance until reissued by EPA; NRC and Department of Transportation (DOT) regs apply to WIPP transport. Dec: Environmental groups raise concern of brine seepage into repository. N16
Carruthers Administration
1988
1988 Brine seepage into WIPP big issue

"Surf's Up"
1988 - May: WIPP begins drilling fourth shaft (air intake shaft) after reevaluating 1982 decision to eliminate it. Sep: SNL reports on in situ permeability (1000 times lower than 1979) and small potential brine inflow. T90 Members of NAS BRWM (not WIPP Panel) study brine inflow; conclude no problem but suggest brine inflow test and less waste be used for pilot phase. First prototype of TRUPACT-II passes structural tests, but fails engulfing fire test at seals. SNL begins work on CAMCON to link detailed consequence models in probabilistic PA. T31, T91, T92 SNL also simultaneously begins work on prototype of CAMCON to meet Dec. 1989 deadline. SNL completes pumping tests at H-11 T93 and begins using results to calibrate regional flow model. T94, T95 1989 - SNL reports on reevaluation of Culebra permeability at AEC-7 and D-268 wells T96; Culebra transmissivity available at 41 locations. T48 Jan & Feb: Redesigned seals of TRUPACT-II pass engulfing fire test. T97 Jan - Aug: Q tunnel mined and instrumented for brine inflow experiment. T98 Feb: SNL resolves discrepancies between measured and predicted salt creep. T99 Westinghouse completes "no-migration" petition for RCRA variance for WIPP pilot phase. T100, T101 Mar: SNL completes report to support Draft Supplemental EIS; report identifies generation of gases from container and waste corrosion as issue (see 1978) because salt permeability factor of 1000 lower than thought in 1979. Based on initial analysis results in February, DOE funds SNL to conduct new studies of gas generation. T102, T103, T104, T105, T106, T107 Also, different flow direction in past during wet climate hypothesized to explain discrepancy between geochemical analysis and current hydrologic flow in Culebra. T48 DOE issues Draft Supplemental EIS. T108, T109 Dec: SNL reevaluates release scenarios and issues WIPP PA demonstration outlining process for future PAs. T110, T111 No release without human intrusion; out of 26 parameters, solubility, intrusion time, and borehole permeability most important; cuttings from direct drilling set at three drums.
1988 - Sep: DOE announces that WIPP will not open as scheduled in Oct. Dec: DOE abruptly cancels SNF and HLW experiments because of NWPAA (no funds available to remove and examine simulated disposal containers).
1988 - NM Congressmen ask NAS BRWM to study brine inflow controversy. With continued technical problems (e.g., TRUPACT-II not yet licensed), NM Congressional delegation cannot reach consensus, and WIPP Land Withdrawal legislation dies. NM Congressmen get Congress to reassign EEG to the New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology in Socorro in Sep because of conflicts between NM state government and EEG. F36 Congressman Richardson insists upon full compliance of WIPP with 40 CFR 191 before receipt of any waste and funding for roads attached to bill. F37
1988 - Jan: EEG issues report on potential brine reservoirs under WIPP. Oct: Idaho Gov. Andrus bans shipments of radioactive waste into state because WIPP not open. Dec: ID Gov. Andrus, CO Gov. Romer, and NM Gov. Carruthers meet in Salt Lake City to discuss WIPP and options to avert shutdown of DOE Rocky Flats Plant from lack of storage authorized by CO, and inability to ship to ID because of imposed ban by Gov. Andrus; DOE agrees to vigorously pursue both administrative and legislative land withdrawal for WIPP. N17
1989
1989 Draft Supplemental EIS identifies gas generation as issue
1989 Berlin Wall falls
1989 Demo for WIPP PA
1989 - DOE Sec: Watkins. Jan: DOE files request for administrative withdrawal of 16 mi2 with DOI (less than half of land allowed by 40 CFR 191). D33 Mar: DOE issues Draft Supplemental EIS. D34 Watkins creates "Blue Ribbon Panel" to examine WIPP readiness. Jun: Watkins announces an indefinite delay in opening of WIPP. Watkins creates "tiger teams" to examine environment, safety, and health issues throughout DOE defense complex. D35
1989 - Aug: NRC approves the pressurized transportation container for shipping contact-handled (CH) TRU to TRUPACT-II.
1989 - Legislature unanimously removes "WIPP exemption" in hazardous waste laws so EPA will grant authority to regulate radioactive mixed waste. Nov: Berlin Wall falls signaling the end of the Cold War and greatly changing future demands for nuclear weapon material and, thus, amount and composition of TRU waste going to WIPP.
Bush Administration

TRI-6342-6219-0
15

1990 - Jan: Construction officially complete. SNL and Westinghouse complete report on the pilot test phase of WIPP T112 suggesting that a waste amount equal to 0.5% of capacity be brought to WIPP for gas generation experiments. May: Westinghouse completes "Final" Safety Analysis Report. T113 SNL refines FEP screening and analyzes four scenarios (E0, E1, E2, E1E2). T114 Dec: SNL issues first full PA highlighting use of CAMCON modeling system T115, T116, T117 (e.g. secondary parameter database completed). Coupling of code demonstrated, which allowed better evaluation such as sensitivity analysis. PA includes both scenario and parameter uncertainty: out of three parameters, solubility, intrusion time, and borehole permeability important; cuttings from direct drilling important release pathway.

1990 - Jan: DOE issues Final Supplemental EIS. D36 Jun: DOE issues "Record of Decision" on WIPP Final Supplemental EIS stating construction is officially complete, testing phase (~5 yr) should proceed, and then another Supplemental EIS should be prepared before going to full operation. D37
1990 - Oct: EPA issues no-migration variance for test phase of WIPP. F38

1990 - Jul: NM granted authority by EPA to regulate radioactive mixed waste, and thus WIPP waste becomes subject to NM regulations. N18 NM Environmental Improvement Division requests submittal of Parts A and B of RCRA permit. Oct: NM designates "preferred route" for waste transport from northern border to WIPP.
1990
1990 Construction officially complete
1990 Supplemental EIS 1990 First full PA of WIPP (1989 PA was demo) uses CAMCON
1991
Test and Predisposal Phase
16
TRI-6342-6220-0
1991 Major models linked in WIPP PA
1991 - Westinghouse completes Parts A and B of RCRA permit application. T118 Apr & Aug: To extend life of room 1, panel 1 for gas generation tests, internal and external panels meet and recommend roof support. Sep: Westinghouse completes construction of roof support. T119, T120 Dec: SNL issues second PA highlighting major components of the PA process and documents T121 (e.g., rigorous use of scenarios and geostatistics for transmissivity fields); 46 parameters sampled; cuttings most important release pathway.
1991 - In response to audit, AL manager creates WIPP Project Integration Office (WPIO) in Albuquerque over WPO in Carlsbad.
1991 - Jan: DOI modifies administrative land withdrawal order to allow test phase of WIPP. F39, F40, F41 Mar: House Interior Committee adopts NM Congressman Richardson's resolution to nullify DOI-modified land withdrawal order (action allowed under Federal Land Policy and Management Act [FLPMA]). F42 Sep: 9th Circuit Court of Appeals rules state ban on radioactive waste shipments imposed by Gov. Andrus of Idaho is illegal. F43 Oct: DOI again grants administrative land withdrawal after Watkins certifies all environmental permitting requirements have been met. F44
1991 - AG: Udall. Oct: AG Udall files 1000-page lawsuit in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia to delay start of test phase at WIPP by challenging the administrative land withdrawal. N19
Bush Administration
King Administration
1992
1992 Refinements to models (e.g., transmissivity fields) in WIPP PA 1992 Congress passes Land Withdrawal Act 1992 NAS questions need for in situ gas generation tests
1992 - SNL and Westinghouse complete work necessary to modify Test Phase Plan for gas generation tests. T122 Westinghouse completes work necessary for modifying Waste Retrieval Plan. T123 Jun: NAS WIPP Panel sends letter to DOE questioning scientific need for in situ waste tests at WIPP. T124 Dec: SNL issues third PA refining models and data used in the PA, uncertainty in transmissivity fields refined, 49 parameters sampled, evaluated timedependent parameter in Poisson intrusion model; direct cuttings most important pathway. T125
1992 - Aug: DOE submits application to New Mexico Environment Department (NMED) for RCRA permit for test phase.
1992 - Oct: WIPP Land Withdrawal Act (LWA) F45: - transfers land from DOI to DOE - establishes EPA as regulator for WIPP (removing self-regulation by DOE); compliance requirements (different from WIPP Panel or EEG) to be set in 40 CFR 194 - requires recertifying site every 5 yr - reinstates Subpart B of 40 CFR 191, except disputed aspects of individual and groundwater protection requirements - requires DOE cooperation and consultation with EEG - NM given $600 million over 30 yr Energy Policy Act F46: - asks NAS to recommend disposal criteria for Yucca Mt. - requires EPA and NRC to reevaluate their disposal criteria for Yucca Mt. Federal Facility Compliance Act F47: - waives federal sovereign immunity for civil and criminal liability for RCRA violations and thus brings DOE facilities under jurisdiction of states but exempts mixed waste stored by DOE Washington DC District Court Judge Penn grants preliminary injunction to stop testing with TRU waste at WIPP. Penn rules WIPP does not qualify for interim status under RCRA, thus must get permits before rather than during operation. 1993 - Feb: EPA announces intent to promulgate 40 CFR 194 to specify requirements for implementing 40 CFR 191 at WIPP. F48 Dec: In response to court remand and WIPP LWA, EPA repromulgates 40 CFR 191 to address individual and groundwater protection requirements, and makes other changes no influential changes for WIPP. F49
1992 - Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) and NRDC join the NM lawsuit and seek to make RCRA issues more important (e.g., interim status of WIPP). N20
King Administration
Clinton Administration
17
TRI-6342-6221-0
1993
1993 DOE decides not to test waste at WIPP 1993 EPA repromulgates 40 CFR 191
1993 - Brine inflow to Q tunnel can be explained as either dewatering of disturbed rock zone or Darcy flow through salt.
1993 - DOE Sec: Hazel O'Leary. Oct: DOE concurs with NAS and decides not to emplace waste in a pilot phase at WIPP lab tests instead. D38 DOE decides to make draft Compliance Certification Application (CCA) to EPA. Because actual waste not coming to WIPP, "bin tests" cancelled. Dec: O'Leary disbands WPIO in Albuquerque and selects new personnel for Carlsbad Area Office (CAO) (old WPO with new functions) and direct reporting to Undersecretary T. Grumbly. D39
1993 - Mayor Forrest of Carlsbad demands more economic benefits accrue to city of Carlsbad from WIPP. N21, N22 NMED issues Draft RCRA permit for test phase. N23
1994
1994 - Mar: SNL explores possibility of linking PA with decision analysis in System Prioritization Methodology (SPM); results form basis of Draft Compliance Certification Application (DCCA). Aug: SNL seeks permits to drill new wells for tracer test in Culebra.
1995 Tracer test begins in Culebra
1994 - Congress authorizes funding for EEG for additional 5 yr. F50
1995
1995 - Feb: Drilling of wells for tracer tests begins. Sep: Gas generation studies completed and results used to establish rates for CCA. T126, T127 Oct: IT Corp. completes cost/benefit study for Westinghouse and DOE of engineered barrier alternatives required by 40 CFR 194. T128 Dec: DOE publishes updated revision of WIPP inventory. T129 Computer specialists hired to modify CAMCON implementation to enforce software configuration management and control runs for PA calculations. Second attempt at SPM.
1995 - Mar: DOE submits DCCA to EPA for review. D40 May: DOE submits Part B of RCRA permit application to NMED. D41 Oct: DOE halts all in situ experiments and closes area in repository.
1995 - NAS provides guidance on new regulation for potential Yucca Mt. repository; suggests reporting risk from human intrusion separately. Jan: EPA proposes compliance criteria for WIPP in 40 CFR 194. F51 May: DOE comments that 40 CFR 194 exceeds scope of 40 CFR 191. Oct: EPA issues draft of nonbinding Compliance Application Guide (CAG). F52

1996 - Apr: SNL completes tracer test in Culebra; decides dual-porosity model reasonable and single-porosity transport alternative model could be ruled out. T131, T132 Jul: SNL reports on early results of retardation batch experiments. T133, T134 Tests on solubility reported for use by CCA. Oct: SNL completes PA for CCA of WIPP that includes MgO backfill mining scenario, and greater intrusion rate; except for few vectors, drill cuttings only release pathway; 57 parameters sampled. T135, T136 Calculation run three times with 100 samples each, takes 37,000 CPU hrs on 40 DEC alpha processors, and retains 100 GB of data in 97,000 files. Nov: NAS reports that WIPP site "excellent choice" geologically. T137, T138

1996 - Oct: DOE sends 80,000-page, 400-lb. CCA to EPA. D42 Nov: DOE issues 84,000-page second Supplemental Draft EIS. D43, D44
1996 - Feb: EPA promulgates final 40 CFR 194; directs DOE to consider additional criteria in assessing system performance F53: - requires waste characterization analysis and engineered barrier evaluation - requires a monitoring system - specifies requirements on quality assurance (QA), peer review, and expert judgment - requires peer review on waste characterization, engineered and natural barriers, and conceptual models - expands human activities (e.g., potash mining) to consider in performance assessment Sep: Congress amends WIPP LWA and relieves WIPP of need to comply with land disposal restrictions of RCRA, but other requirements of RCRA still apply. F54 Dec: EPA begins detailed evaluation of CCA and supporting information at SNL and elsewhere, including SNL PA conceptual models, computer codes, model parameters, QA records, and specific technical issues (e.g., MgO backfill and passive institutional control). F55 1997 - May: In letter to DOE secretary, EPA Administrator Browner decrees DOE application "complete"; this starts the 1-yr clock for review of CCA. Jun: Appeals Court in Washington rules meetings between EPA and DOE proper when one agency proposes regulations for another agency as required by Executive Order and says NM and TX "lawsuit is without basis". F56 Oct: EPA issues draft rule to approve WIPP with conditions: requires use of panel seals used in PA; design requires QA for waste generators; lists requirements for using process knowledge to characterize wastes; requires schedule for installing passive controls; denies any protective credit for passive controls; and 120-day public comment period begins. F54

1996 - Apr: NM AG Udall sues EPA alleging improper meetings were held between EPA and DOE about requirements in proposed 40 CFR 194 regulation. N24
1996
1996 EPA states how to implement radioactive waste standard in 40 CFR 194
1996 SNL completes PA for WIPP certification; moving van required to send copies to EPA 1996 Tests on solubility reported 1996 SNL concludes dual porosity model explains transport in Fracture Culebra
Matrix Fracture
;;; ;;;
18
1997
TRI-6342-6222-0
1997 Conceptual Model Peer Review Group approves WIPP models
1997 - Jan: Conceptual Model Peer Review Group (formed in response to 40 CFR 194) concludes 22 of 24 conceptual models adequate. Spallings model must be redone because unrealistic and MgO backfill description improved. Mar: SNL conducts mini-PA for EPA to do parametric sensitivity analysis of PA model parameters lacking "iron-clad" defense. Apr: Conceptual Model Peer Review Group reports that with additional information provided by SNL, they are satisfied that the model of the MgO backfill is adequate T139 and that they have sufficient understanding of how much the spallings model overestimates spall volumes. T140 DOE commits to develop a less conservative, more realistic spallings model by the time of recertification. May: SNL explains apparent discrepancy between geohydrology and geochemistry by viewing flow in Culebra as a 3D regional system. T141 As part of EPA evaluation of CCA, SNL runs PA calculations using EPA-selected values for 26 parameters and EPA-selected model assumptions, based on results from parameter review team comments in Dec 96 and sensitivity analysis in Mar 97.
1997 - DOE Secretary: Pea. Jan: DOE holds hearings on second Supplemental Draft EIS for WIPP in Carlsbad, Albuquerque, and Santa Fe, New Mexico. D45 Sep: Final second Supplemental EIS on WIPP published. D46
1998
1998 EPA certifies WIPP
1999
1999 NMED grants RCRA permit
1998 - Jan: DOE publishes record of decision to proceed with opening WIPP based on second Supplemental EIS. Jul: DOE Secretary: Richardson (former NM Congressman). 1999 - Mar: First shipment of non-RCRA waste arrives at WIPP from Los Alamos. T142, T143 Apr: First shipment of non-RCRA waste arrives at WIPP from INEEL. T145 Jun: First shipment of non-RCRA waste arrives at WIPP from Rocky Flats. T146
1998 - May: EPA certifies WIPP. F53
1998 - Jul: NM AG Udall sues EPA alleging insufficient time to comment on CCA. CARD and SWRIC also file lawsuits. N25
1999 - Mar: Judge Penn lifts injunction placed on WIPP in 1992; also reverses decision and states WIPP does qualify for interim status under RCRA. Jun: Court of Appeals, District of Columbia, dismisses (without hearing oral arguments) CARD and SWRIC petition to overturn EPA certification. F60
1999 - Feb & Mar: NMED holds hearings in Santa Fe on RCRA permit for WIPP. N26 Apr: NM AG Madrid withdraws from lawsuit challenging EPA certification. N27 Oct: NM grants WIPP RCRA permit. N28
19
TRI-6342-6223-0
References
References for U.S. President and DOE: Directives and Decisions D1 DOE (U.S. Department of Energy). 1980. Final Environmental Impact Statement: Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. DOE/EIS-0026. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy, Assistant Secretary for Defense Programs. Vols. 1-2. Boffey, P.M. 1975. Radioactive Waste Disposal: The Atomic Energy Commission Brings the Academy to Heel, The Brain Bank of America: An Inquiry into the Politics of Science. P.M. Boffey. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Book Company. 89-111, 276-278. Teller, E. 1959. The Plowshare Program, Proceedings of the Second Plowshare Symposium, San Francisco, CA, May 13-15, 1959. UCRL-5675. Livermore, CA: Livermore Radiation Laboratory. 8-13. (Copy on file in the Sandia WIPP Central Files [SWCF], Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM as WPO#44080.) EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 1985. Background Information Document for Final Rule. High-Level and Transuranic Radioactive Wastes. EPA 520/1-85-023. Washington, DC: Office of Radiation Programs, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Perge, A. 1982. Historical Overview, Proceedings of Alpha-Contaminated Waste Management Workshop, Gaithersburg, MD, August 10-13, 1982. CONF-820845. Oak Ridge, TN: Oak Ridge National Laboratory. 17-30. AEC (Atomic Energy Commission). 1970. Title 10Atomic Energy Chapter IAtomic Energy Commission Part 50Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities, Siting of Fuel Reprocessing Plants and Related Waste Management Facilities, Federal Register. Vol. 35, no. 222, 17530-17533. Lipschutz, R.D. 1980. Radioactive Waste: Politics, Technology, and Risk. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger Publishing Company, A Division of Harper & Row. 119, 144. AEC (Atomic Energy Commission). 1971. Environmental Statement: Radioactive Waste Repository, Lyons, Kansas. WASH-1503. [Washington, DC]: United States Atomic Energy Commission. (Copy on file in the SWCF as WPO#47929.) D9 Metlay, D.S. 1978. History and Interpretation of Radioactive Waste Management in the United States, Essays on Issues Relevant to the Regulation of Radioactive Waste Management. W.P. Bishop, I.R. Hoos, N. Hilberry, D.S. Metlay, and R.A. Watson. NUREG-0412. Washington, DC: Division of Fuel Cycle and Material Safety, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 6-9.
D2
D10 Carter, L.J. 1987. Nuclear Imperatives and Public Trust: Dealing with Radioactive Waste. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future, Inc.; [Baltimore, MD]: Distributed by John Hopkins University Press. 64-69, 86, 177. D11 NAS/NRC (National Academy of Sciences/National Research Council). 1984. Review of the Scientific and Technical Criteria for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP). DOE/DP/48015-1. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. D12 EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 1985. 40 CFR Part 191: Environmental Standards for the Management and Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel, High-Level and Transuranic Radioactive Wastes; Final Rule, Federal Register. Vol. 50, no. 182, 3806638089. D13 Ford, G.R. 1976. The White House Fact Sheet: Presidents Nuclear Waste Management Plan. October 28, 1976. Washington, DC: Office of the White House Press Secretary. (On file at Gerald R. Ford Library, 1000 Beal Avenue, Ann Arbor, MI, Telephone: 313/7412218.) D14 Logan, S.E. 1976. Workshop on Geologic Data Requirements for Radioactive Waste Management Assessment Models, Santa Fe, NM, June 28-July 1, 1976. Y/OWI/SUB76/81726, UNM Report No. NE-27(76), Union Carbide 297-1. Albuquerque, NM: University of New Mexico, College of Engineering, Bureau of Engineering Research for Office of Waste Isolation, Union Carbide Corporation, Nuclear Division. (Copy on file in the SWCF as WPO#52833.) D15 Sjoblom, G. 1982. Regulatory Policy of the EPA Related to Alpha-Contaminated Waste, Proceedings of Alpha-Contaminated Waste Management Workshop, Gaithersburg, MD, August 10-13, 1982. CONF-820845. Oak Ridge, TN: Oak Ridge National Laboratory. 47-58.
D3
D4
D5
D6
D7
D8
20
D16 Weart, W.D. 1979. WIPP: A Bedded Salt Repository for Defense Radioactive Waste in Southeastern New Mexico, Radioactive Waste in Geologic Storage, 176th Annual Meeting of the American Chemical Society, Miami Beach, FL, September 11-15, 1978. Ed. S. Fried. ACS Symposium Series No. 100. SAND78-0934C. Washington, DC: American Chemical Society. 13-36. D17 McAuliffe, D. 1978. Licensing Impasse and New Mexico Emotions May Force DOE to Bury WIPP, Nucleonics Week. Vol. 19, no. 36, 2-3. D18 DOE (U.S. Department of Energy). 1978. Report of Task Force for Review of Nuclear Waste Management. Draft. DOE/ER-0004/D. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy, Directorate of Energy Research. D19 Carter, L.J. 1978. Trouble Even in New Mexico for Nuclear Waste Disposal, Science. Vol. 199, no. 4333, 1050-1051. D20 IRG (Interagency Review Group on Nuclear Waste Management). 1979. Report to the President by the Interagency Review Group on Nuclear Waste Management. TID-29442. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy. (Copy on file in the SWCF as WPO#47934.) D21 DOE (U.S. Department of Energy). 1979. Draft Environmental Impact Statement: Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. DOE/EIS-0026-D. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy. Vols. 1-2. D22 Carter, J.E. 1982. Appendix A: Presidential Message and Fact Sheet of February 12, 1980, The Politics of Nuclear Waste. Ed. E.W. Colglazier, Jr. New York, NY: Pergamon Press. 220-241. D23 DOE (U.S. Department of Energy). 1980. New Mexico; Proposed Withdrawal and Reservations of Lands, Federal Register. Vol. 45, no. 223, 75768-75769. D24 DOE (U.S. Department of Energy). 1981. Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP): Record of Decision, Federal Register. Vol. 46, no. 18, 9162-9164. D25 DOE (U.S. Department of Energy). 1992. Definitive Design (Title II), Project Management System. DOE Order 4700.1. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy. V-40 through V-41. (Copy on file in the SWCF as WPO#48333.) D26 DOE (U.S. Department of Energy). 1983. Summary of the Results of the Evaluation of the WIPP Site and Preliminary Design Validation Program. WIPP-DOE-161. Albuquerque, NM:
U.S. Department of Energy. (Copy on file in the SWCF as WPO#48675.) D27 LEAF (Legal Environmental Assistance Foundation, Inc.) and Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., State of Tennessee on behalf of Tennessee Department of Health and Environment (Intervening Plaintiff) v. Donald Hodel, Secretary, United States Department of Energy and United States Department of Energy. No. CIV. 3-83-562. 1984. 586 Federal Supplement 1163. (Copy on file in the SWCF as WPO#48129.) D28 DOE (U.S. Department of Energy). 1983. Announcement of Decision to Proceed with Construction of the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), Federal Register. Vol. 48, no. 128, 30427-30428. D29 Krenz, D.L. 1986. Letter dated August 1986 to Evert H. Beckner, Vice President, Energy Programs, Sandia National Laboratories from D.L. Krenz, Assistant Manager for Projects and Energy Programs, DOE Albuquerque Operations Office. (Copy on file in the SWCF as PA00820.) D30 Beckner, E.H. 1986. Letter dated Aug. 29, 1986, to Mr. Dennis L. Krenz, Assistant Manager to Projects and Energy Programs, DOE Albuquerque Operations Office, E.H. Beckner, Vice President, Energy Programs, Sandia National Laboratories. (Copy on file in the SWCF as PA00820.) D31 DOE (U.S. Department of Energy). 1987. 10 CFR Part 962 Radioactive WasteByproduct Material, Federal Register. Vol. 52, no. 84, 15937-15941. D32 Memorandum of Understanding between the U.S. Department of Energy and the U.S. Department of Labor, signed by R.L. Bernard, DOL Administrator for Metal and Nonmetal Mine Safety and Health, and R.G. Romatowski, DOE Manager of Albuquerque Operations Office, dated July 9, 1987. (Copy on file in the SWCF as WPO#9992.) D33 EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 1982. 40 CFR Part 191: Environmental Standards for the Management and Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel, High-Level and Transuranic Radioactive Wastes; Proposed Rule, Federal Register. Vol. 47, no. 250, 58196-58206. D34 DOE (U.S. Department of Energy). 1989. Waste Isolation Pilot Plant; Availability of Draft Supplement to the Final Environmental Impact Statement, Federal Register. Vol. 54, no. 76, 16350-16352.
21
D35 McCutcheon, C. 1989. Embattled WIPP Wont Open in 89, Albuquerque Journal. June 28, 1989. Section A, pages 1, 3. D36 DOE (U.S. Department of Energy). 1990. Final Supplement Environmental Impact Statement, Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. DOE/EIS-0026-FS. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Environmental Restoration and Waste Management. Vols. 1-13. D37 DOE (U.S. Department of Energy). 1990. Record of Decision; Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, Federal Register. Vol. 55, no. 121, 25689-25692. D38 Anonymous. 1993. Reversal on Nuclear Waste Tests, Science News. Vol. 144, no. 19, 303. D39 McCutcheon, C. 1993. WIPP Staff Wont Move to Carlsbad, Albuquerque Journal. June 11, 1993. Section D, page 3. D40 DOE (U.S. Department of Energy). 1995. Draft 40 CFR 191 Compliance Certification Application for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. Phase II Review. DOE/CAO-Predecisional Draft-2056. Carlsbad, NM: U.S. Department of Energy, Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, Carlsbad Area Office. Books 1-2. (Copy on file in the SWCF as WPO#21135 and WPO#21136.)
D41 DOE (U.S. Department of Energy). 1995. Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Part B Permit Application. DOE/WIPP 91-005, Rev. 5. Carlsbad, NM: Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. Vols. I-X. D42 Taugher, M. 1996. Key WIPP Document Exceeds 400 Lbs, Albuquerque Journal. November 21, 1996. Section D, page 3. D43 Chiri, T.W. 1996. Documentation Puts WIPP Opening Closer, Carlsbad Current-Argus. November 21, 1996. Section A, pages 1, 2. D44 DOE (U.S. Department of Energy). 1996. Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Disposal Phase Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement. November 1996. DOE/EIS-0026S-2. Carlsbad, NM: U.S. Department of Energy, Carlsbad Area Office.
D45 Spohn, L. 1997. Last Series of WIPP Hearings to Begin Monday, Albuquerque Tribune. January 4, 1997. Section A, page 3. D46 DOE (U.S. Department of Energy). 1997. Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Disposal Phase Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement. DOE/EIS-0026-S-2. Carlsbad, NM: U.S. Department of Energy, Carlsbad Area Office.
22
References for Federal Legislation, Judicial Decisions, and Regulatory Requirements Related to Nuclear Waste Disposal F1 Pub. L. 79-585. 1946. Atomic Energy Act of 1946. (60 Stat. 755). (Copy on file in the SWCF as WPO#43711.) Pub. L. 83-703. 1954. Atomic Energy Act of 1954. (68 Stat. 919). (Copy on file in the SWCF as WPO#43705.) Pub. L. 91-190. 1970. National Environmental Policy Act of 1969. (83 Stat. 852; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 1993. Part 1Statement of Organization and General Information, Code of Federal Regulations 40, Part 1. Washington, DC: Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office. Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970. 1970. Federal Register. Vol. 35, no. 194, 1562315626. (5 U.S.C. 903, Paragraph 301, Section 2(a)6; 84 Stat. 2086). Perge, A. 1982. Historical Overview, Proceedings of Alpha-Contaminated Waste Management Workshop, Gaithersburg, MD, August 10-13, 1982. CONF-820845. Oak Ridge, TN: Oak Ridge National Laboratory. 17-30. Pub. L. 93-438. 1974. Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 (88 Stat. 1233; 42 U.S.C. 5801 et seq.). Carter, L.J. 1987. Nuclear Imperatives and Public Trust: Dealing with Radioactive Waste. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future, Inc.; [Baltimore, MD]: Distributed by Johns Hopkins University Press. 64-69, 86, 177. MRSRC (Monitored Retrievable Storage Review Commission). 1989. Nuclear Waste: Is There a Need for Federal Interim Storage? Report of the Monitored Retrievable Storage Review Commission. November 1, 1989. Washington, DC: Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office. (Copy on file in the SWCF as WPO#51784.)
in Light-Water-Cooled Nuclear Power Reactor Effluents, Federal Register. Vol. 40, no. 87, 19442-19443. F12 Rasmussen, N.C. 1975. Reactor Safety Study: An Assessment of Accident Risks in U.S. Commercial Nuclear Power Plants. NUREG-75/014, WASH-1400. Washington, DC: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. (Available from the NTIS as PB-248 200-Set.) F13 Pub. L. 94-580. 1976. Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976. (90 Stat. 2795 and subsequent amendments; 42 U.S.C. 6901 et seq.). F14 Krenz, D.L. 1986. Letter dated August 1986 to Evert H. Beckner, Vice President, Energy Programs, Sandia National Laboratories from D.L. Krenz, Assistant Manager for Projects and Energy Programs, DOE Albuquerque Operations Office. (Copy on file in the SWCF as PA00820.) F15 Pub. L. 95-91. 1977. Department of Energy Organization Act. (91 Stat. 565; 42 U.S.C. 7101 et seq.). F16 EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 1978. Environmental Protection Criteria for Radioactive Wastes: Announcement of Public Forum, Federal Register. Vol. 43, no. 10, 2223. F17 EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 1985. 40 CFR Part 191: Environmental Standards for the Management and Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel, High-Level and Transuranic Radioactive Wastes; Final Rule, Federal Register. Vol. 50, no. 182, 3806638089. F18 EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 1978. Criteria for Radioactive Wastes; Invitation for Comment: Environmental Protection, Federal Register. Vol. 43, no. 221, 53262-53268. F19 Pub. L. 96-164. 1979. Department of Energy National Security and Military Applications of Nuclear Energy Authorization Act of 1980. (93 Stat. 1259). F20 Sjoblom, G. 1982. Regulatory Policy of the EPA Related to Alpha-Contaminated Waste, Proceedings of Alpha-Contaminated Waste Management Workshop, Gaithersburg, MD, August 10-13, 1982. CONF-820845. Oak Ridge, TN: Oak Ridge National Laboratory. 47-58. F21 NRC (Nuclear Regulatory Commission). 1981. Disposal of High-Level Radioactive Wastes in Geologic Repositories: Licensing Procedures,
F2
F3
F4
F5
F6
F7
F8
F9
F10 EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 1976. 40 CFR Part 260: Environmental Radiation Protection Standards for High-Level Radioactive Waste; Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Federal Register. Vol. 41, no. 235, 53363. F11 NRC (Nuclear Regulatory Commission). 1975. 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix INumerical Guides for Design Objectives and Limiting Conditions for Operation to Meet the Criterion 'As Low as Practicable' for Radioactive Material
23
Federal Register. Vol. 46, no. 37, 1397113987. F22 Freiwald, J. 1982. Legislature and Political Aspects of Waste Disposal, Proceedings of Alpha-Contaminated Waste Management Workshop, Gaithersburg, MD, August 10-13, 1982. CONF-820845. Oak Ridge, TN: Oak Ridge National Laboratory. 35-38. F23 EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 1985. Background Information Document: Final Rule for High-Level and Transuranic Radioactive Wastes. EPA 520/1-85-023. Washington, DC: Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Radiation Programs. F24 DOI (U.S. Department of the Interior). Bureau of Land Management. 1982. 43 CFR Public Land Order 6232. New Mexico; Withdrawal of Lands, Federal Register. Vol. 47, no. 61, 13340. F25 Pub. L. 97-425. 1983. Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982. (96 Stat. 2201; 42 U.S.C. 10101 et. seq.). F26 EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 1982. 40 CFR Part 191: Environmental Standards for the Management and Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel, High-Level and Transuranic Radioactive Wastes; Proposed Rule, Federal Register. Vol. 47, no. 250, 58196-58206. F27 DOI (U.S. Department of the Interior). Bureau of Land Management. 1983. 43 CFR Public Land Order 6403. New Mexico; Withdrawal of Lands, Federal Register. Vol. 48, no. 130, 31038-31039. F28 NRC (Nuclear Regulatory Commission). 1983. 10 CFR Part 60 Disposal of High-Level Radioactive Wastes in Geologic Repositories: Technical Criteria; Final Rule, Federal Register. Vol. 48, no. 120, 28194-28229. F29 SAB (EPA Science Advisory Board). 1984. Report on the Review of Proposed Environmental Standards for the Management and Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel, High-Level and Transuranic Radioactive Wastes (40 CFR 191). Washington, DC: High-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Subcommittee, Science Advisory Board, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. F30 Legal Environmental Assistance Foundation, Inc. and Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., State of Tennessee on behalf of Tennessee Department of Health and Environment (Intervening Plaintiff) v. Donald Hodel, Secretary, United States Department of Energy and United States Department of Energy. No. CIV. 3-83-562. 1984. 586 Federal Supplement
1163. (Copy on file in the SWCF as WPO#48129.) F31 Pub. L. 98-616. 1984. The Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984. (98 Stat. 3221). F32 U.S. Congress. Office of Technology Assessment. 1985. Managing the Nation's Commercial High-Level Radioactive Waste. OTA-O-171. Washington, DC: Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office. (Copy on file in the SWCF as WPO#48316.) F33 EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 1986. State Authorization To Regulate the Hazardous Components of Radioactive Mixed Wastes Under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act; Notice, Federal Register. Vol. 51, no. 128, 24504-24505. F34 NRDC (Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.) v. United States Environmental Protection Agency, et al. 1987. 824 Federal Reporter, 2d Series 1258. (Copy on file in the SWCF as WPO#43240.) F35 Pub. L. 100-203. 1987. Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1987. (101 Stat. 1330; 42 U.S.C. 10101 et seq.). F36 Pub. L. 100-456. 1988. National Defense Authorization Act, Fiscal Year 1989. (102 Stat. 1918). F37 Wieck, P.R., and B. Spice. 1988. Delegation Buries WIPP Bill for Session, Albuquerque Journal. October 4, 1988. Section A, pp. 1, 3. F38 EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 1990. Conditional No-Migration Determination for the Department of Energy Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), Federal Register. Vol. 55, no. 220, 47700-47721. F39 DOI (U.S. Department of the Interior). Bureau of Land Management. 1991. 43 CFR Public Land Order 6826. Modification of Public Land Order No. 6503; New Mexico, Federal Register. Vol. 56, no. 18, 3038-3039. F40 DOI (U.S. Department of the Interior). Bureau of Land Management. 1991. Record of Decision (ROD), Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) Project; New Mexico, Federal Register. Vol. 56, no. 18, 3114-3115. F41 DOI (U.S. Department of the Interior). Bureau of Land Management. 1991. 43 CFR Public Land Order 6826. Modification of Public Land Order No. 6403; New Mexico, Federal Register. Vol. 56, no. 29, 5731.
24
F42 Pub. L. 94-579. 1976. Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976. (90 Stat. 2743; 43 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.). F43 State of Idaho, Petitioner, Shoshone-Bannock Tribes, Intervenors, v. U.S. Department of Energy, Respondent, Public Service Company of Colorado, Intervenor. No. 91-70094. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Decided September 20, 1991. 945 Federal Reporter, 2d Series 295. (Copy on file in the SWCF as WPO#48323.) F44 DOI (U.S. Department of the Interior). Bureau of Land Management. 1991. Notice to Proceed, Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) Project, New Mexico, Federal Register. Vol. 56, no. 196, 50923-50924. F45 Pub. L. 102-579. 1992. Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Land Withdrawal Act. (106 Stat. 4777). F46 Pub. L. 102-486. 1976. Energy Policy Act of 1992. (106 Stat. 2776; 42 U.S.C. 13201 et seq.). F47 Pub. L. 102-386. 1992. Federal Facility Compliance Act of 1992. (106 Stat. 1505). F48 EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 1993. Criteria for the Certification of Compliance with Environmental Radiation Protection Standards for the Management and Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel, High-Level and Transuranic Radioactive Wastes; Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Federal Register. Vol. 58, no. 27, 8029-8030. F49 EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 1993. 40 CFR Part 191: Environmental Radiation Protection Standards for the Management and Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel, High-Level and Transuranic Radioactive Wastes, Final Rule, Federal Register. Vol. 58, no. 242, 66398-66416. F50 Pub. L. 103-160. 1993. National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1994. (107 Stat. 1547). F51 EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 1995. 40 CFR Part 194: Criteria for the Certification and Determination of the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant's Compliance With Environmental Standards for the Management and Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel, High-Level and Transuranic Radioactive Wastes; Proposed Rule, Federal Register. Vol. 60, no. 19, 57665791. F52 EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 1995. Draft Compliance Application Guidance (CAG) Document; Notice of Availability, Federal Register. Vol. 60, no. 201, 5392153922.
F53 EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 1996. 40 CFR Part 194: Criteria for the Certification and Re-Certification of the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant's Compliance With the 40 CFR Part 191 Disposal Regulations; Final Rule, Federal Register. Vol. 61, no. 28, 52245245. F54 Pub. L. 104-201. 1996. National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997. Subtitle FWaste Isolation Pilot Plant Land Withdrawal Act Amendments. (110 Stat. 2851). F55 Nichols, M.D. 1996. Aspects of the CCA Requiring More Documentation for Completeness and Technical (Particularly Computer Codes) Concerns Before Rulemaking. Recipient: A.L. Alm. Date 12/19/96. Washington, DC: United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air and Radiation. (Copy on file in the SWCF as WPO#47192.) F56 Taugher, M. 1997. Appeals Court Rules WIPP Criteria Meetings OK, Albuquerque Journal. June 7, 1997. Section D, page 3. F57 EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 1997. 40 CFR Part 194: Criteria for the Certification and Re-Certification of the Waste Isolation Pilot Plants Compliance With the 40 CFR Part 191 Disposal Regulations: Certification Decision; Proposed Rule, Federal Register. Vol. 62, no. 210, 58792-58838. F58 Taugher, M. 1997. Agency Finds Disputed WIPP Safe to Open, Albuquerque Journal. October 24, 1997. Section A, page 1. F59 EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 1998. 40 CFR Part 194: Criteria for the Certification and Re-Certification of the Waste Isolation Pilot Plants Compliance With the 40 CFR Part 191 Disposal Regulations: Certification Decision; Final Rule, Federal Register. Vol. 63, no. 95, 27354-27406. F60 Anonymous. 1999. Court Tosses Petition Against WIPP License, Albuquerque Journal. July 2, 1999, Section B, p. 1.
25
References for New Mexico Administration, Regional Issues, and Legal Challenges N1 Sandia National Laboratories. 1989. Recollections for Tomorrow. SAND89-1953. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. 18-19. Perge, A. 1982. Historical Overview, Proceedings of Alpha-Contaminated Waste Management Workshop, Gaithersburg, MD, August 10-13, 1982. CONF-820845. Oak Ridge, TN: Oak Ridge National Laboratory. 17-30. Environmental Improvement Act, New Mexico Statutes 1978 Annotated (1993 Repl.). Vol. 13, Chapter 74, Article 1, Sections 74-1-1 through 74-1-10. Charlottesville, VA: The Michie Company. (Copy on file in the SWCF as WPO#47578.) Carter, L.J. 1987. Nuclear Imperatives and Public Trust: Dealing with Radioactive Waste. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future, Inc.; [Baltimore, MD]: Distributed by Johns Hopkins University Press. 64-69, 86, 177. Hazardous Waste Act, New Mexico Statutes 1978 Annotated (1993 Repl.). Vol. 14, Chapter 74, Article 4, Sections 74-4-1 through 74-4-14. Charlottesville, VA: The Michie Company. (Copy on file in the SWCF as WPO#47585.) Article 4A Radioactive Materials, New Mexico Statutes 1978 Annotated (1993 Repl.). Vol. 13, Chapter 74, Article 4A, Sections 744A-1 through 74-4A-19. Charlottesville, VA: The Michie Company. (Copy on file in the SWCF as WPO#47586.) SRIC (Southwest Research and Information Center, Inc.). 1981. Nuclear Waste Disposal, The Workbook. Vol. VI, no. 2, 44. (Copy on file in the SWCF as WPO#47565.) State of New Mexico, ex rel., Jeff Bingaman, Attorney General of the State of New Mexico, Plaintiff, v. The United States Department of Energy, et al., Defendants. 1981. "Stipulated Agreement." Civil Action No. 81-0363 JB. (United States District Court for the District of New Mexico). July 1, 1981. (Copy on file in the SWCF as WPO#42008.) SRIC (Southwest Research and Information Center, Inc.), Peter Montague; Michael Rutherford; Bill Pierce; and June Naylor, Plaintiffs, v. United States Department of Energy; James Edwards, Secretary of the United States Department of Energy; United States Department of Interior; United States Bureau of Land Management; and Robert F. Burford, Director of the Bureau of Land Management, Defendants. Civil No. 81-0537-JB. United
States District Court, District of New Mexico. Action filed July 10, 1981. Judgment rendered October 1, 1984, by U.S. District Judge Juan C. Burciaga. (Copy on file in the SWCF as WPO#47567.) N10 Documents Related to State of New Mexico v. U.S. Department of Energy Including the Supplemental Stipulated Agreement Resolving Certain State Off-Site Concerns Over WIPP and the Opinion of the General Counsel of the Department of Energy on Application of the Price-Anderson Act to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. 1982. (Copy on file in the SWCF as WPO#48652.) N11 Neill, R.H., J.K. Channell, L. Chaturvedi, M.S. Little, K. Rehfeldt, and P. Spiegler. 1983. Evaluation of the Suitability of the WIPP Site. EEG-23. Santa Fe, NM: Environmental Evaluation Group, Environmental Improvement Division. N12 Neill, R.H., and J.K. Channell. 1983. Potential Problems from Shipment of High-Curie Content Contact-Handled Transuranic (CH-TRU) Waste to WIPP. EEG-24. Santa Fe, NM: New Mexico Health and Environment Department, Environmental Evaluation Group. N13 EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 1985. 40 CFR Part 271: New Mexico; Decision on Final Authorization of State Hazardous Waste Management Program: Notice of Final Determination on New Mexicos Application for Final Authorization, Federal Register. Vol. 50, no. 8, 1515-1516. N14 NRDC (Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.) v. United States Environmental Protection Agency, et al. 1987. 824 Federal Reporter, 2d Series 1258. Nos. 85-1915, 86-1096 to 861098. United States Court of Appeals, First Circuit. July 17, 1987. As Amended August 12, 1987. (Copy on file in the SWCF as WPO#43240.) N15 Channell, J.K., J.C. Rodgers, and R.H. Neill. 1986. Adequacy of TRUPACT-I Design for Transporting Contact-Handled Transuranic Wastes to WIPP. EEG-33. Santa Fe, NM: New Mexico Health and Environment Department, Environmental Evaluation Group. N16 Begley, S., and M. Miller. 1987. A Nuclear Dump Springs a Leak, Newsweek. Vol. 110, no. 26, 65. N17 Cummings, R.G. 1988. New Mexico Waste Isolation Pilot Project (WIPP): An Historical Overview. DOE/NV/10461-T15. Albuquerque, NM: University of New Mexico for State of Nevada, Agency for Nuclear Projects/Nuclear
N2
N3
N4
N5
N6
N7
N8
N9
26
Waste Project Office. 9-11. (Copy on file in the SWCF as WPO#47158.) N18 EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 1990. 40 CFR Part 271: State of New Mexico: Final Authorization of State Hazardous Waste Management Program; Final Rule, Federal Register. Vol. 55, no. 133, 28397-28398. N19 State of New Mexico, ex rel., Tom Udall, Attorney General, Plaintiff, Natural Resources Defense Council, et al., and State of Texas, ex rel., Dan Morales, Attorney General, PlaintiffsIntervenors, v. James D. Watkins, Secretary of the Department of Energy, et al., Defendants. Environmental Defense Fund, et al., Plaintiffs, v. James D. Watkins, Secretary of the Department of Energy, et al., Defendants. Civ. A. Nos. 91-2527, 91-2929. United States District Court, District of Columbia. December 13, 1991. 783 Federal Supplement 628. N20 State of New Mexico, ex rel., Tom Udall, Attorney General, Plaintiffs, Natural Resources Defense Council, et al., and State of Texas, ex rel., Dan Morales, Attorney General, PlaintiffsIntervenors, v. James D. Watkins, Secretary of Energy, et al., Defendants. v. James D. Watkins, Secretary of the Department of Energy, et al., Defendants. Civ. A. No. 91-2527, 91-2929. United States District Court, District of Columbia. February 3, 1992. 783 Federal Supplement 633. N21 McCutcheon, C. 1993. WIPP Staff Won't Move to Carlsbad, Albuquerque Journal. June 11, 1993. Section D, page 3.
N22 Welch, B. 1993. Local Group to Meet Energy Secretary over WIPP Standstill, Carlsbad Current-Argus. August 23, 1993. Section A, pages 1, 2. N23 NMED (New Mexico Environment Department). 1993. Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Draft Hazardous Waste Facility Permit Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP). EPA I.D. Number NM4890139088. [Santa Fe, NM]: New Mexico Environment Department. Vols. 1-4. (Copy on file at Zimmerman Government Publications, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM as #E 1.28:DOE/WID 93-RCRA/DRAFT.) N24 Eichstaedt, P. 1996. Udall: WIPP Unsafe, Lawsuit Alleges EPA Eased Rules," Albuquerque Journal. April 9, 1996. Section C, page 3. N25 Anonymous. 1999. Opponents: WIPP Must Wait, Albuquerque Journal. January 26, 1999, Section D, p. 1. N26 Ferry, B. 1999. Hearings on WIPP Permit Start Monday, Santa Fe New Mexican. February 18, 1999, Section B, p. 1. N27 Anonymous. 1999. State Withdraws from Suit Over EPA Certification of WIPP, Las Cruces Sun-News. May 6, 1999, Section A, p. 5. N28 Parker-Stevens, V. 1999. WIPP Gets Hazardous Waste Permit from State, Carlsbad Current-Argus. October 28, 1999, Section A, pp. 1, 8.
27
References for Technical Milestones Related to the WIPP T1 AEC (Atomic Energy Commission). 1948. Report of the Safety and Industrial Health Advisory Board. April 2, 1948. Washington, DC: United States Atomic Energy Commission. Hacker, B.C. 1987. The Dragons Tail: Radiation Safety in the Manhattan Project, 1942-1946. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. 4, 5, 69-73 NAS/NRC (National Academy of Sciences/National Research Council). 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land: Report of the Committee on Waste Disposal of the Division of Earth Sciences. Publication 519. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences/National Research Council. (Copy on file in the SWCF as WPO#41159.) U.S. Congress. 1970. National Academy of Sciences-National Research Council, Congressional Record. Vol. 116, pt. 10, 1357013589. Mongan, T.R., S.R. Ripple, G.P. Brorby, and D.G. diTommaso. 1996. Plutonium Releases from the 1957 Fire at Rocky Flats, Health Physics. Vol. 71, no. 4, 510-521. NAS/NRC (National Academy of Sciences/National Research Council). 1959. Radioactive Waste Disposal into Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Waters. Publication 655. Washington, DC: Working Group of the Committee on Oceanography of the National Academy of Sciences - National Research Council. (Copy on file in the SWCF as WPO#47431.) Claiborne, H.C., and F. Gera. 1974. Potential Containment Failure Mechanisms and Their Consequences at a Radioactive Waste Repository in Bedded Salt in New Mexico. ORNL-TM-4639. Oak Ridge, TN: Oak Ridge National Laboratory. (Copy on file in the SWCF as WPO#41224.) Gard, L.M. 1968. Geologic Studies, Project Gnome, Eddy County, New Mexico. Geological Survey Professional Paper 589. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Interior [Geological Survey; For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents], U.S. Government Printing Office. (Copy on file in the SWCF as WPO#48945. Pierce, W.G., and E.I. Rich. 1962. Summary of Rock Salt Deposits in the United States as Possible Storage Sites for Radioactive Waste Materials. Geological Survey Bulletin 1148. Washington, DC: Geological Survey. (Copy on file in the SWCF as WPO#48688.)
T10 Bradshaw, R.L., and W.C. McClain, eds. 1971. Project Salt Vault: A Demonstration of the Disposal of High-Activity Solidified Wastes in Underground Salt Mines. ORNL-4555. Oak Ridge, TN: Oak Ridge National Laboratory. (Copy on file in the SWCF as WPO#48808.) T11 McClain, W.C., and R.L. Bradshaw. 1970. Status of Investigations of Salt Formations for Disposal of Highly Radioactive Power-Reactor Wastes, Nuclear Safety. Vol. 11, no. 2, 130141. T12 Teller, E. 1959. The Plowshare Program, Proceedings of the Second Plowshare Symposium, San Francisco, CA, May 13-15, 1959. UCRL-5675. Livermore, CA: Livermore Radiation Laboratory. 8-13. (Copy on file in the SWCF as WPO#44080.) T13 Wheeler, B.R., B.R. Dickey, G.E. Lohse, D.E. Black, D.W. Rhodes, and J.A. Buckham. 1967. Storage of Radioactive Solids in Underground Facilities: Current ICPP Practices and Future Concepts, Disposal of Radioactive Wastes into the Ground, Proceedings of a Symposium Jointly Organized by the International Atomic Energy Agency and the European Nuclear Energy Agency of the OECD, Vienna, Austria, May 29-June 2, 1967. Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency. 421-440. (Copy on file in the SWCF as WPO#48156.) T14 Boffey, P.M. 1975. Radioactive Waste Disposal: The Atomic Energy Commission Brings the Academy to Heel, The Brain Bank of America: An Inquiry into the Politics of Science. P.M. Boffey. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Book Company. 89-111, 276-278. T15 Carter, L.J. 1987. Nuclear Imperatives and Public Trust: Dealing with Radioactive Waste. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future, Inc.; [Baltimore, MD]: Distributed by Johns Hopkins University Press. 64-69, 86, 177. T16 U.S. Congress. 1970. Radioactive Waste Management: An Interim Report of the Committee on Radioactive Waste Management, Congressional Record. Vol. 116, pt. 10, 13592-13593. T17 Davies, L.E. 1969. Fire Cleanup Keeps Plutonium Plant Busy, New York Times. June 27, 1969, p. 10. T18 Perge, A. 1982. Historical Overview, Proceedings of Alpha-Contaminated Waste Management Workshop, Gaithersburg, MD, August 10-13, 1982. CONF-820845. Oak Ridge, TN: Oak Ridge National Laboratory. 17-30. T19 NAS/NRC (National Academy of Sciences/National Research Council). 1970.
T2
T3
T4
T5
T6
T7
T8
T9
28
Disposal of Solid Radioactive Wastes in Bedded Salt Deposits. Washington, DC: Committee on Radioactive Waste Management, National Academy of Sciences/National Research Council; U.S. Government Printing Office. (Copy on file in the SWCF as WPO#43139.) T20 Cooper, J.B., and J.M. Glanzman. 1971. Geohydrology of Project Gnome Site, Eddy County, New Mexico. Geological Survey Professional Paper 712-A. Washington, DC: United States Government Printing Office. T21 Brokaw, A.L., C.L. Jones, M.E. Cooley, and W.H. Hays. 1972 . Geology and Hydrology of the Carlsbad Potash Area, Eddy and Lea Counties, New Mexico. Open-file report USGS4339-1. Denver, CO: United States Department of the Interior, Geological Survey. (Copy on file in the SWCF as WPO#43356.) T22 Anderson, R.E., D.H. Eargle, and B.O. Davis. 1973. Geologic and Hydrologic Summary of Salt Domes in Gulf Coast Region of Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama. Open-file report USGS-4339-2. Denver, CO: United States Department of the Interior, Geological Survey. (Copy on file in the SWCF as WPO#43862.) T23 Mytton, J.W. 1973. Two Salt Structures in Arizona: The Supai Salt Basin and the Luke Salt Body. Open-file report USGS-4339-3. Denver, CO: United States Department of the Interior, Geological Survey. (Copy on file in the SWCF as WPO#48691.) T24 Bachman, G.O., R.B. Johnson, and F.A. Swenson. 1973. Stability of Salt in the Permian Salt Basin of Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas, and New Mexico, With a Section on Dissolved Salts in Surface Water. Open-file report USGS-4339-4. Denver, CO: United States Department of the Interior, Geological Survey. (Copy on file in the SWCF as WPO#41298.) T25 Merewether, E.A., J.A. Sharps, J.R. Gill, and M.E. Cooley. 1973. Shale, Mudstone, and Claystone as Potential Host Rocks for Underground Emplacement of Waste. Open-file report USGS-4339-5. Denver, CO: United States Department of the Interior, Geological Survey. (Copy on file in the SWCF as WPO#48204.) T26 Hite, R.J., and S.W. Lohman. 1973. Geologic Appraisal of Paradox Basin Salt Deposits for Waste Emplacement. Open-file report USGS4339-6. Denver, CO: United States Department of the Interior, Geological Survey. (Copy on file in the SWCF as WPO#48650.)
T27 Jones, C.L., M.E. Cooley, and G.O. Bachman. 1973. Salt Deposits of Los Medaos Area, Eddy and Lea Counties, New Mexico, With Sections on Ground Water Hydrology. Openfile report USGS-4339-7. Denver, CO: United States Department of the Interior, Geological Survey. (Copy on file in the SWCF as WPO#43835.) T28 Bachman, G.O. 1973. Surficial Features and Late Cenozoic History in Southeastern New Mexico. Open-file report USGS-4339-8. Denver, CO: United States Department of the Interior, Geological Survey. (Copy on file in the SWCF as WPO#41293.) T29 Barnes, H. 1974. Geologic and Hydrologic Background for Selecting Site of Pilot-plant Repository for Radioactive Waste, Bulletin of the Association of Engineering Geologists. Vol. XI, no. 1, 83-92. T30 NAS/NRC (National Academy of Sciences/National Research Council). 1984. Review of the Scientific and Technical Criteria for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP). Panel on the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, Board on Radioactive Waste Management, Commission on Physical Sciences, Mathematics, and Resources, National Research Council. DOE/DP/48015-1. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. T31 Rechard, R.P., ed. 1992. Users Reference Manual for CAMCON: Compliance Assessment Methodology Controller, Version 3.0. SAND90-1983. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. T32 Rasmussen, N.C. 1975. Reactor Safety Study: An Assessment of Accident Risks in U.S. Commercial Nuclear Power Plants. NUREG75/014, WASH-1400. Washington, DC: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. (Available from the NTIS as PB-248 200-Set.) T33 Sandia National Laboratories and U.S. Geological Survey. 1983. Basic Data Report for Drillhole ERDA 6 (Waste Isolation Pilot Plant - WIPP). SAND79-0267. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. T34 Powers, D.W., S.J. Lambert, S-E. Shaffer, L.R. Hill, and W.D. Weart, eds. 1978. Geological Characterization Report, Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) Site, Southeastern New Mexico. SAND78-1596. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia [National] Laboratories. Vols. I-II. T35 Gulick, C.W., Jr. 1978. Borehole PluggingMaterials Development Program. SAND780715. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories.
29
T36 Barr, G.E., and P.D. OBrien. 1976. Selective Adsorption of Radionuclides in Geologic Storage Media; Disclosure of Potentially Patentable Subject. Unpublished Memorandum from G.C. Newlin to W.D. Weart, March 11, 1976. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. (Copy on file in the SWCF as ERMS#500136.) T37 Dawson, P.R., and J.R. Tillerson. 1978. Nuclear Waste Canister Thermally Induced Motion. SAND78-0566. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. T38 Molecke, M.A. 1978. Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Transuranic Wastes Experimental Characterization Program: Executive Summary. SAND78-1356. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia [National] Laboratories. T39 Sandia [National] Laboratories. 1979. Summary of Research and Development Activities in Support of Waste Acceptance Criteria for WIPP. Comp. T.O. Hunter. SAND79-1305. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia [National] Laboratories. T40 Sandia [National] Laboratories. 1977. Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) Conceptual Design Report. SAND77-0274. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia [National] Laboratories. T41 Gulick, C.W., Jr. 1979. Borehole Plugging Program, Plugging of ERDA No. 10 Drill Hole. SAND79-0789. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. T42 Tyler, L.D., R.V. Matalucci, M.A. Molecke, D.E. Munson, E.J. Nowak, and J.C. Stormont. 1988. Summary Report for the WIPP Technology Development Program for Isolation of Radioactive Waste. SAND88-0844. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. T43 Smith, T. 1982. Risk and Safety Analyses for Disposal of Alpha-Contaminated Waste in INEL, Proceedings of Alpha-Contaminated Waste Management Workshop, Gaithersburg, MD, August 10-13, 1982. CONF-820845. Oak Ridge, TN: Oak Ridge National Laboratory. 395-436. T44 Lamoreaux, G.H., L.E. Romesberg, S.H. Sutherland, and T.A. Duffey. 1980. ContactHandled Transuranic Transportation System Structural Analysis (TRUPACT), Patram 80, 6th International Symposium on Packaging and Transporting Radioactive Materials, Berlin, Germany, November 10-14, 1980. Ed. H.W. Hbner. Berlin: Bundesanst fr Materialprf (BAM). Vol. 2, 1214-1221. T45 May, R.A., L.E. Romesberg, H.R. Yoshimura, W.E. Baker, and J.C. Hokanson. 1980.
Analytical and Empirical Evaluation of LowLevel Waste Drum Response to Accident Environments, Patram 80, 6th International Symposium on Packaging and Transporting Radioactive Materials, Berlin, Germany, November 10-14, 1980. Ed. H.W. Hbner. Berlin: Bundesanst fr Materialprf (BAM). Vol. 2, 1321-1328. T46 Romesberg, L.E., S.H. Sutherland, G.H. Lamoreaux, and R.G. Eakes. 1981. Design of Packaging for Transporting Transuranic Contaminated Wastes, Damage Prevention in the Transportation Environment, Proceedings of the 34th Meeting of the Mechanical Failures Prevention Group, National Bureau of Standards, Gaithersburg, MD, October 21-23, 1981. Ed. T.R. Shives. NBS Special Publication 652; SAND81-1308C. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce, National Bureau of Standards; Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. 16 pp. T47 Kosiewicz, S.T., B.L. Barraclough, and A. Zerwekh. 1980. Studies of Transuranic Waste Storage Under Conditions Expected in the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), Interim Summary Report, October 1, 1977-June 15, 1979. LA-7931-PR. Los Alamos, NM: Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory. (Copy on file in the SWCF as WPO#48813.) T48 Lappin, A.R., R.L. Hunter, D.P. Garber, and P.B. Davies, eds. 1989. Systems Analysis, Long-Term Radionuclide Transport, and Dose Assessments, Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), Southeastern New Mexico; March 1989. SAND89-0462. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. T49 DOE (U.S. Department of Energy). 1979. Draft Environmental Impact Statement, Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. DOE/EIS-0026-D. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy. Vols. 1-2. T50 Campbell, J.E., R.T. Dillon, M.S. Tierney, H.T. Davis, P.E. McGrath, F.J. Pearson, Jr., H.R. Shaw, J.C. Helton, and F.A. Donath. 1978. Risk Methodology for Geologic Disposal of Radioactive Waste: Interim Report. SAND780029, NUREG/CR-0458. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. T51 Cranwell, R.M., J.E. Campbell, J.C. Helton, R.L. Iman, D.E. Longsine, N.R. Ortiz, G.E. Runkle, and M.J. Shortencarier. 1987. Risk Methodology for Geologic Disposal of Radioactive Waste: Final Report. SAND812573, NUREG/CR-2452. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. T52 Hunter, T.O. 1979. Technical Issues of Nuclear Waste Isolation in the Waste Isolation
30
Pilot Plant (WIPP), Proceedings, 87th National Meeting of American Institute of Chemical Engineers, Boston, MA, August 1922, 1979. SAND79-1117C. New York, NY: American Institute of Chemical Engineers. (Copy on file in the SWCF as WPO#26711.) T53 Sattler, A.R., and C.L. Christensen. 1980. Measurements of Very Large Deformations in Potash Salt in Conjunction With an Ongoing Mining Operation. SAND79-2254. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. T54 McVey, D.F. 1981. Analysis of Data from Line Source Thermal Conductivity Measurements Taken In Situ in Dome Salt at the Avery Island Mine. SAND81-1232. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. T55 Ewing, R.I. 1981. WIPP Test of a Radiant Heater in the Avery Island Salt Mine. SAND811305. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. T56 Christensen, C.L., R.D. Statler, and E.W. Peterson. 1980. Downhole Television (DHTV) Applications in Borehole Plugging. SAND800459. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. T57 Bingham, F.W., and G.E. Barr. 1980. Development of Scenarios for the Long-Term Release of Radionuclides from the Proposed Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in Southeastern New Mexico, Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management, Proceedings of the International Symposium, Boston, MA, November 27-30, 1979. Ed. C.J.M. Northrup, Jr. SAND790955C. New York, NY: Plenum Press. Vol. 2, 771-778. T58 Bartlett, J.W., H.C. Burkholder, and W.K. Winegardner. 1977. Safety Assessment of Geologic Repositories for Nuclear Waste, Nuclear Systems Reliability Engineering and Risk Assessment. Eds. J.B. Fussell and G.R. Burdick. Philadelphia, PA: Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics. 636-660. (Copy on file in SWCF as WPO#45677.) T59 DOE (U.S. Department of Energy). 1980. WIPP SAR: Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Safety Analysis Report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy. Vols. 1-5. T60 Molecke, M.A., and T.M. Torres. 1984. The Waste Package Materials Field Test in S.E. New Mexico Salt, Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management VII, Materials Research Society Symposia Proceedings, Boston, MA, November 14-17, 1983. Ed. G.L. McVay. SAND83-1516C. New York, NY: NorthHolland. Vol. 26, 69-76.
T61 Bechtel National, Inc. 1986. WIPP Design Validation Final Report. DOE/WIPP-86-010. San Francisco, CA: Bechtel National, Inc. T62 DOE (U.S. Department of Energy). 1997. Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Disposal Phase Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement. September 1997. DOE/EIS-0026-S2. Carlsbad, NM: Department of Energy, Carlsbad Area Office. T63 State of New Mexico, ex rel., Jeff Bingaman, Attorney General of the State of New Mexico, Plaintiff, v. The United States Department of Energy, et al., Defendants. 1981. Stipulated Agreement. Civil Action No. 81-0363 JB. United States District Court for the District of New Mexico, July 1, 1981. (Copy on file in the SWCF as WPO#42008.) T64 Popielak, R.S., R.L. Beauheim, S.R. Black, W.E. Coons, C.T. Ellingson, and R.L. Olsen. 1983. Brine Reservoirs in the Castile Formation, Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) Project, Southeastern New Mexico. TME 3153. Albuquerque, NM: U.S. Department of Energy, Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. (Copy on file in the SWCF as WPO#42085.) T65 Campbell, J.E., and R.M. Cranwell. 1988. Performance Assessment of Radioactive Waste Repositories, Science. Vol. 239, no. 4846, 1389-1392. T66 Campbell, J.E., C.D. Leigh, and D.E. Longsine. 1991. NEFTRAN-S: A Network Flow and Contaminant Transport Model for Statistical and Deterministic Simulations Using Personal Computers. SAND90-1987. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. T67 IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency). 1981. Safety Assessment for the Underground Disposal of Radioactive Wastes. Safety Series No. 56. Vienna, Austria: International Atomic Energy Agency. T68 Matalucci, R.V., C.L. Christensen, T.O. Hunter, M.A. Molecke, and D.E. Munson. 1982. Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) Research and Development Program: In Situ Testing Plan, March 1982. SAND81-2628. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. T69 Lambert, S.J. 1983. Dissolution of Evaporites In and Around the Delaware Basin, Southeastern New Mexico and West Texas. SAND82-0461. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. T70 Snyder, R.P., L.M. Gard, Jr., and J.W. Mercer. 1982. Evaluation of Breccia Pipes in Southeastern New Mexico and Their Relation to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) Site, with a Section on Drill-Stem Tests, WIPP 31.
31
Open-File Report 82-968. Denver, CO: Prepared by the U.S. Geological Survey for the Albuquerque Operations Office, U.S. Department of Energy. T71 Mercer, J.W. 1983. Geohydrology of the Proposed Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Site, Los Medaos Area, Southeastern New Mexico. Open-File Report 83-4016. Albuquerque, NM: U.S. Geological Survey. T72 Gonzalez, D.D. 1983. Groundwater Flow in the Rustler Formation, Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), Southeast New Mexico (SENM): Interim Report. SAND82-1012. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. T73 Borns, D.J., L.J. Barrows, D.W. Powers, and R.P. Snyder. 1983. Deformation of Evaporites Near the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) Site. SAND82-1069. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. T74 Earth Technology Corporation. 1988. Final Report for Time Domain Electromagnetic (TDEM) Surveys at the WIPP Site. H. Cline and M. Blohm. SAND87-7144. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. T75 Beauheim, R.L., B.W. Hassinger, and J.A. Klaiber. 1983. Basic Data Report for Borehole Cabin Baby-1 Deepening and Hydrologic Testing, Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) Project, Southeastern New Mexico. WTSDTME-020. Albuquerque, NM: U.S. Department of Energy, Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. T76 Lappin, A.R. 1988. Summary of SiteCharacterization Studies Conducted From 1983 Through 1987 at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) Site, Southeastern New Mexico. SAND88-0157. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. T77 Lynch, R.W., R.L. Hunter, D.R. Anderson, F.W. Bingham, J.M. Covan, G.F. Hohnstrieter, T.O. Hunter, R.D. Klett, E.E. Ryder, T.L. Sanders, and W.D. Weart. 1991. Deep Geologic Disposal in the United States: The Waste Isolation Pilot Plant and Yucca Mountain Projects. SAND90-1656. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. T78 Nowak, E.J. 1986. Brine Migration Studies in the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), Waste Management 86 - Waste Isolation in the U.S., Technical Programs and Public Education, Proceedings of the Symposium on Waste Management, Tucson, AZ, March 2-6, 1986. Ed. R.G. Post. SAND85-1987C. Tucson, AZ: University of Arizona. Vol. 2, 153-158. T79 Beauheim, R.L. 1986. Hydraulic-Test Interpretations for Well DOE-2 at the Waste
Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) Site. SAND861364. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. T80 NRC (Nuclear Regulatory Commission). 1994. Part 71Packaging and Transportation of Radioactive Material, Code of Federal Regulations 10, Part 71. Washington, DC: Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office. T81 Morgan, H.S., C.M. Stone, and R.D. Krieg. 1985. The Use of Field Data to Evaluate and Improve Drift Response Models for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), Research and Engineering Applications in Rock Masses, Proceedings of the 26th U.S. Symposium on Rock Mechanics, Rapid City, SD, June 26-28, 1985. Ed. E. Ashworth. Boston, MA: A.A. Balkema. Vol. 2, 769-776. T82 Morgan, H.S., C.M. Stone, and R.D. Krieg. 1986. An Evaluation of WIPP Structural Modeling Capabilities Based on Comparisons with South Drift Data. SAND85-0323. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. T83 Romesberg, L.E., and M.L. Hudson. 1986. "Impact, Puncture and Thermal Testing of TRUPACT-I," Proceedings of an International Symposium on the Packaging and Transportation of Radioactive Materials (PATRAM '86), Davos, Switzerland, June 1620, 1986. SAND84-2067C, IAEA-SM-286/107. Vienna, Austria: International Atomic Energy Agency. Vol. 2, 511-519. T84 Romesberg, L.E., R.S. Longenbaugh, and B.J. Joseph. 1989. Fire Testing and Analysis of TRUPACT-I Thermal Test Article. SAND862710, TTC-0704. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. T85 Sandoval, R.P., and L.C. Sanchez. 1987. TRUPACT Containment Issues, Proceedings of an International Symposium on the Packaging and Transportation of Radioactive Materials (PATRAM '86), Davos, Switzerland, June 16-20, 1986. SAND85-2203C. Vienna, Austria: International Atomic Energy Agency. Vol. 2, 719-727. T86 Warrant, M.M., J.M. Nelsen, and S.W. Woolfolk. 1987. Containment Analysis of TRUPACT-I, Proceedings of an International Symposium on the Packaging and Transportation of Radioactive Materials (PATRAM '86), Davos, Switzerland, June 1620, 1986. SAND85-2188C, IAEA-SM-286111P. Vienna, Austria: International Atomic Energy Agency. Vol. 2, 529-536.
32
T87 Beauheim, R.L. 1987. Analysis of Pumping Tests of the Culebra Dolomite Conducted at the H-3 Hydropad at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) Site. SAND86-2311. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. T88 Haug, A., V.A. Kelley, A.M. LaVenue, and J.F. Pickens. 1987. Modeling of Ground-Water Flow in the Culebra Dolomite at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) Site: Interim Report. SAND86-7167. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. T89 Reeves, M., V.A. Kelley, and J.F. Pickens. 1987. Regional Double-Porosity Solute Transport in the Culebra Dolomite: An Analysis of Parameter Sensitivity and Importance at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) Site. SAND87-7105. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. T90 Nowak, E.J., D.F. McTigue, and R. Beran. 1988. Brine Inflow to WIPP Disposal Rooms: Data, Modeling, and Assessment. SAND880112. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. T91 Rechard, R.P. 1991. CAMCON: Computer System for Assessing Regulatory Compliance of the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, Proceedings of the International Conference on Probabilistic Safety Assessment and Management (PSAM), Beverly Hills, CA, February 4-7, 1991. Ed. G. Apostolakis. SAND90-2094C. New York, NY: Elsevier Science Publishers. Vol. 2, 899-904. T92 Rechard, R.P. 1989. Review and Discussion of Code Linkage and Data Flow in Nuclear Waste Compliance Assessments. SAND87-2833. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. T93 Beauheim, R.L. 1989. Interpretation of the H11b4 Hydraulic Tests and the H-11 Multipad Pumping Test of the Culebra Dolomite at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) Site. SAND89-0536. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. T94 LaVenue, A.M., A. Haug, and V.A. Kelley. 1988. Numerical Simulation of Ground-Water Flow in the Culebra Dolomite at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) Site: Second Interim Report. SAND88-7002. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. T95 LaVenue, A.M., T.L. Cauffman, and J.F. Pickens. 1990. Ground-Water Modeling of the Culebra Dolomite. Volume I: Model Calibration. SAND89-7068/1. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. T96 Beauheim, R.L., T.F. Dale, and J.F. Pickens. 1991. Interpretations of Single-Well Hydraulic
Tests of the Rustler Formation Conducted in the Vicinity of the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Site, 1988-1989. SAND89-0869. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. T97 Nuclear Packaging, Inc. 1989. Safety Analysis Report for the TRUPACT-II Shipping Package, Rev. 4. SR00045. Washington, DC: Nuclear Packaging, Inc. Vols. 1-5. (Copy on file in the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Public Document Room, Washington, DC, 1-800-3974209.) T98 Jensen, A.L., C.L. Howard, R.L. Jones, and T.P. Peterson. 1993. Room Q Data Report: Test Borehole Data From April 1989 Through November 1991. SAND92-1172. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. T99 Munson, D.E., A.F. Fossum, and P.E. Senseny. 1989. Advances in Resolution of Discrepancies Between Predicted and Measured In Situ WIPP Room Closures. SAND88-2948. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. T100 DOE (U.S. Department of Energy). 1989. Waste Isolation Pilot Plant; Availability of Draft Supplement to the Final Environmental Impact Statement, Federal Register. Vol. 54, no. 76, 16350-16352. T101 DOE (U.S. Department of Energy). 1989. Waste Isolation Pilot Plant No-Migration Variance Petition. DOE/WIPP 89-003, Rev. 0. Carlsbad, NM: Westinghouse Electric Corporation, Waste Isolation Division. T102 Brush, L.H. 1990. Test Plan for Laboratory and Modeling Studies of Repository and Radionuclide Chemistry for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. SAND90-0266. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. T103 Brush, L.H., D. Grbic-Galic, D.T. Reed, X. Tong, R.H. Vreeland, and R.E. Westerman. 1991. Preliminary Results of Laboratory Studies of Repository Chemistry for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management XIV, Materials Research Society Symposium Proceedings, Boston, MA, November 26-29, 1990. Eds. T.A. Abrajano, Jr. and L.H. Johnson. SAND901031C. Pittsburgh, PA: Materials Research Society. Vol. 212, 893-900. T104 Brush, L.H., M.A. Molecke, A.R. Lappin, R.E. Westerman, X. Tong, J.N.P. Black, D. GrbicGalic, R.E. Vreeland, and D.T. Reed. 1991. Laboratory and Bin-Scale Tests of Gas Generation for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, Waste-Generated Gas at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, Papers Presented at the Nuclear Energy Agency Workshop on Gas Generation and Release from Radioactive Waste
33
Repositories. Eds. P.B. Davies, L.H. Brush, M.A. Molecke, F.T. Mendenhall, and S.W. Webb. SAND91-2378. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. 2-1 through 213. T105 Reed, D.T., S. Okajima, L.H. Brush, and M.A. Molecke. 1993. Radiolytically-Induced Gas Production in Plutonium-Spiked WIPP Brine, Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management XVI, Materials Research Society Symposium Proceedings, Boston, MA, November 30December 4, 1992. Eds. C.G. Interrante and R.T. Pabalan. SAND92-7283C. Pittsburgh, PA: Materials Research Society. Vol. 294, 431438. T106 Telander, M.R., and R.E. Westerman. 1993. Hydrogen Generation by Metal Corrosion in Simulated Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Environments: Progress Report for the Period November 1989 through December 1992. SAND92-7347. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. T107 Francis, A.J., and J.B. Gillow. 1994. Effects of Microbial Processes on Gas Generation Under Expected Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Repository Conditions, Progress Report Through 1992. SAND93-7036. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. T108 DOE (U.S. Department of Energy). 1989. Draft Supplement, Environmental Impact Statement, Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. DOE/EIS-0026-DS. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy, Assistant Secretary for Defense Programs. Vols. 1-2. (Copy on file in the SWCF as WPO#43133.) T109 Hunter, R.L. 1989. Events and Processes for Constructing Scenarios for the Release of Transuranic Waste from the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, Southeastern New Mexico. SAND89-2546. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. T110 Marietta, M.G., S.G. Bertram-Howery, D.R. Anderson, K.F. Brinster, R.V. Guzowski, H. Iuzzolino, and R.P. Rechard. 1989. Performance Assessment Methodology Demonstration: Methodology Development for Evaluating Compliance With EPA 40 CFR 191, Subpart B, for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. SAND89-2027. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. T111 Bertram-Howery, S.G., M.G. Marietta, D.R. Anderson, K.F. Brinster, L.S. Gomez, R.V. Guzowski, and R.P. Rechard. 1989. Draft Forecast of the Final Report for the Comparison to 40 CFR Part 191, Subpart B, for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. SAND88-
1452. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. T112 DOE (U.S. Department of Energy). 1990. WIPP Test Phase Plan: Performance Assessment. DOE/WIPP 89-011, Revision 0. Carlsbad, NM: United States Department of Energy, Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. T113 DOE (U.S. Department of Energy). 1990. Final Safety Analysis Report, Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, Carlsbad, New Mexico. WP 02-9, Rev. 0. Carlsbad, NM: Westinghouse Electric Corporation. Vols. 1-8. (Copy on file in the SWCF as WPO#43327.) T114 Guzowski, R.V. 1990. Preliminary Identification of Scenarios That May Affect the Escape and Transport of Radionuclides From the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, Southeastern New Mexico. SAND89-7149. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. T115 Rechard, R.P., H.J. Iuzzolino, J.S. Rath, A.P. Gilkey, R.D. McCurley, and D.K. Rudeen. 1989. User's Manual for CAMCON: Compliance Assessment Methodology Controller. SAND88-1496. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. T116 Bertram-Howery, S.G., M.G. Marietta, R.P. Rechard, P.N. Swift, D.R. Anderson, B.L. Baker, J.E. Bean, Jr., W. Beyeler, K.F. Brinster, R.V. Guzowski, J.C. Helton, R.D. McCurley, D.K. Rudeen, J.D. Schreiber, and P. Vaughn. 1990. Preliminary Comparison with 40 CFR Part 191, Subpart B for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, December 1990. SAND90-2347. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. T117 Rechard, R.P., W. Beyeler, R.D. McCurley, D.K. Rudeen, J.E. Bean, and J.D. Schreiber. 1990. Parameter Sensitivity Studies of Selected Components of the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Repository/Shaft System. SAND89-2030. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. T118 DOE (U.S. Department of Energy). 1992. Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Part B Permit Application. DOE/WIPP 91-005, Revision 1.0. Carlsbad, NM: Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. Vols. I-VII. T119 DOE (U.S. Department of Energy). 1991. Report of the Geotechnical Panel on the Effective Life of Rooms in Panel 1. DOE/WIPP 91-023. Carlsbad, NM: Westinghouse Electrical Corporation, Waste Isolation Division. T120 DOE (U.S. Department of Energy). 1992. WIPP Supplementary Roof Support System Room 1, Panel 1 Geotechnical Field Data
34
Analysis Bi-Annual Report. DOE/WIPP 92024. Carlsbad, NM: Westinghouse Electrical Corporation, Waste Isolation Division. T121 WIPP PA (Performance Assessment) Division. 1991-1992. Preliminary Comparison with 40 CFR Part 191, Subpart B for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, December 1991. SAND91-0893/1/2/3. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. Vols. 1-3. T122 DOE (U.S. Department of Energy). 1993. Test Phase Plan for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. DOE/WIPP 89-011, Revision 1. Albuquerque, NM: U.S. Department of Energy, WIPP Project Integration Office. T123 DOE (U.S. Department of Energy). 1993. Waste Retrieval Plan for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. DOE/WIPP-89-022, Revision 1. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy. T124 NRC (National Research Council). 1992. A Letter Report by the Panel on the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, Board on Radioactive Waste Management. Washington, DC: Commission on Geosciences, Environment, and Resources, National Research Council. (Copy on file in the SWCF as WPO#35203-35204.) T125 WIPP PA (Performance Assessment) Department. 1992-1993. Preliminary Performance Assessment for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, December 1992. SAND920700/1/2/3/4/5. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. Vols. 1-5. T126 Francis, A.J., J.B. Gillow, and M.R. Giles. 1997. Microbial Gas Generation Under Expected Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Repository Conditions. SAND96-2582. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. T127 Telander, M.R., and R.E. Westerman. 1997. Hydrogen Generation by Metal Corrosion in Simulated Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Environments. SAND96-2538. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. T128 DOE (U.S. Department of Energy). 1995. Engineered Alternatives Cost/Benefit Study Final Report. DOE/WIPP 95-2135 Revision 0. Albuquerque, NM: IT Corporation; Carlsbad, NM: United States Department of Energy, Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, Carlsbad Area Office. T129 DOE (U.S. Department of Energy). 1995. Transuranic Waste Baseline Inventory Report (Revision 2). DOE/CAO-95-1121. Carlsbad, NM: U.S. Department of Energy, Carlsbad Area Office. T130 Prindle, N.H., F.T. Mendenhall, D.M. Boak, W. Beyeler, D. Rudeen, R.C. Lincoln, K. Trauth,
D.R. Anderson, M.G. Marietta, and J.C. Helton. 1996. The Second Iteration of the Systems Prioritization Method: A Systems Prioritization and Decision-Aiding Tool for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, Volume 1: Synopsis of Method and Results. SAND95-2017/1. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. T131 Meigs, L.C., and J.T. McCord. 1996. Physical Transport in the Culebra Dolomite. Unpublished Memorandum to File, July 11, 1996. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. (Copy on file in the SWCF as WPO#39167.) T132 Meigs, L.C., R.L. Beauheim, J.T. McCord, Y.W. Tsang, and R. Haggerty. 1997. Design, Modelling, and Current Interpretations of the H19 and H-11 Tracer Tests at the WIPP Site, Field Tracer Experiments, Role in the Prediction of Radionuclide Migration: Synthesis and Proceeding of an NEA/EC GEOTRAP Workshop, Cologne, Germany, August 28-30, 1996. SAND96-2796C. Paris: Nuclear Energy Agency, Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development. 157-169. T133 Papenguth, H.W., and Y.K. Behl. 1996. Test Plan: Evaluation of Dissolved Actinide Retardation at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. TP 96-02. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. (Copy on file in the SWCF as WPO#31336.) T134 Brush, L.H., and L.J. Storz. 1996. Revised Ranges and Probability Distributions of Kds for Dissolved Pu, Am, U, Th, and Np in the Culebra for the PA Calculations to Support the WIPP CCA. Memo to M.S. Tierney, July 24, 1996. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. (Copy on file in the SWCF as WPO#41561.) T135 EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 1996. 40 CFR Part 194: Decision to Certify Whether the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Complies with the 40 CFR Part 191 Disposal Regulations and the 40 CFR Part 194 Compliance Criteria; Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR), Federal Register. Vol. 61, no. 222, 58499-58500. T136 Taugher, M. 1996. Key WIPP Document Exceeds 400 Lbs, Albuquerque Journal. November 21, 1996. Section D, page 3. T137 NAS/NRC (National Academy of Sciences/ National Research Council). 1996. The Waste Isolation Pilot Plant: A Potential Solution for the Disposal of Transuranic Waste. Committee on the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, Board on Radioactive Waste Management, Commission
35
on Geosciences, Environment, and Resources, National Research Council. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. 6, 79-80. T138 Taugher, M. 1996. Scientists: WIPP Not A Threat, Albuquerque Journal. October 24, 1996. Section A, pages 1, 10. T139 Hansen, F.D., M.K. Knowles, T.W. Thompson, M. Gross, J.D. McLennan, and J.F. Schatz. 1997. Description and Evaluation of a Mechanistically Based Conceptual Model for Spall. SAND97-1369. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. T140 Anonymous. 1997. Independent Experts: WIPP Conceptual Models Adequate, Carlsbad Current-Argus. May 11, 1997. Section A, page 3. T141 Corbet, T. 1997. Expedited CCA Activity: Geochemistry/Hydrology Issue in Culebra. Unpublished Report. Albuquerque, NM:
Sandia National Laboratories. (Copy on file in the SWCF as WPO#43215.) T142 Taugher, M., and S. Smallwood. 1999. WIPP Opening Ushers in New Nuclear Era, Albuquerque Journal. March 27, 1999. Section A, pp. 1, 2. T143 Brooke, J. 1999. Deep Desert Grave Awaits First Load of Nuclear Waste, New York Times. March 26, 1999. Section A, pp. 1, 18. T144 Weart, W.D. 1983. Summary Evaluation of the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) Site Suitability. SAND83-0450. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories. T145 Langston, J. 1999. Getting the Waste Out, Idaho Falls Post Register. April 28, 1999, Section A, p. 1. T146 Taugher, M. 1999. WIPP Receives Colo. Waste, Albuquerque Journal. June 17, 1999, Section D, p. 1.
36

980072

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

980072

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

980072

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Milestones for Disposal of Radioactive Waste at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) in the United States

for the United States Department under contract DE-AC04-94AL85000

Issued by Sandia National Laboratories, operated Department of Energy by Sandm Corporation.

for the United States

Early History of Nuclear Waste Disposal Related to the WIPP

Early Studies at the WIPP

and the had of the

Development of Methodology for Assessing Compliance of the WIPP

Compliance Setting for the WIPP

Detailed Tabulation of WIPP Milestones

Milestones for Disposal of Radioactive Waste in the United States

Legal Challenges and New Mexico, National, and World Issues

1949 1951 1952

Simms Admin. Mechem Admin.

1961 Gnome test

1961 - AEC Chairman: Seaborg (co-discoverer of Pu)

1963 ORNL Project Salt Vault

Milestones for Disposal of Radioactive Waste in the United States

Legal Challenges and New Mexico, National, and World Issues

1972 Lyons site judged unacceptable

1973 Carlsbad location chosen

1974 Draft of 1st PRA on nuclear reactors

Regional Characterization (SNL Phases)

1974 ORNL conducts scenario development and consequence analysis of WIPP

Siting Phase (DOE Phases)

1975 WIPP moved toward basin center

1975 - AG: Anaya.

1976 ERDA-9 drilled at center of WIPP site

1977 DOE created

1977 WIPP conceptual design with two levels

1977 - NM Hazardous Waste Act N5 seeks to maintain environmental quality.

1978 Oversight by WIPP panel of NAS and NM EEG begins

Regional Characterization (SNL Phases)

Siting Phase (DOE Phases)

Milestones for Disposal of Radioactive Waste in the United States

U.S. President and DOE: Directives and Decisions

Legal Challenges and New Mexico, National, and World Issues

1980 Final EIS on WIPP

1981 First shaft drilled

1981 Stipulated agreement between DOE and New Mexico signed

yyyyy ;;;;; yyyyy ;;;;; yy ;;

Disposal System Characterization

1982 USGS dismisses concerns about breccia pipes

1982 Disposal area moved to south of shafts

Disposal System Characterization

1983 Full construction begins

Full Construction Phase

1984 SNL begins fielding many underground experiments

Milestones for Disposal of Radioactive Waste in the United States

U.S. President and DOE: Directives and Decisions

Legal Challenges and New Mexico, National, and World Issues

1985 EPA promulgates 40 CFR 191

Disposal System Characterization

1985 SNL reports on discrepancy in creep first hinted at in 1982

Full Construction Phase

1987 Brine pockets cannot be dismissed

1988 Brine seepage into WIPP big issue

1989 Draft Supplemental EIS identifies gas generation as issue

1989 Berlin Wall falls

1989 Demo for WIPP PA