Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-pftt2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-05T19:39:24.225Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Nuclear Repository Performance Assessment: Insights into Critical Models and Parameters Affecting Projected Future Doses

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 September 2012

R. K. Mcguire
Affiliation:
Risk Engineering, Inc., 4155 Darley Avenue, Suite A, Boulder, CO 80303
J. H. Kessler
Affiliation:
Electric Power Research Institute, P.O. Box 10412, Palo Alto, CA 94303
J. A. Vlasity
Affiliation:
Risk Engineering, Inc., 4155 Darley Avenue, Suite A, Boulder, CO 80303
Get access

Abstract

The Phase 3 Total System Performance Assessment (TSPA) sponsored by the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) has led to new insights into critical models and parameters affecting estimated doses to humans from a potential repository of high-level radioactive wastes at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. The Phase 3 model has been extended to encompass time-varying climate and infiltration, detailed modeling of the source term and hydrology, and detailed specification of possible interaction between percolating ground water and waste containers. The model estimates doses to a time of one million years.

The three key radionuclides contributing to estimated total doses are Tc-99,1–129, and Np-237. Five other nuclides contributing to dose in lesser (but significant) amounts are U-233, Th-229, Pa-231, Ac-227, and Se-79. These results are consistent with other TSPAs.

From sensitivity studies, the most critical models and parameters are as follows. Infiltration and percolation assumptions, including the amount of lateral diversion of infiltration water, are important and need verification with site data and/or more detailed modeling. Parameters of the unsaturated zone (UZ) and saturated zone (SZ) determine dilution and delay of concentrations and peak doses downstream. The fraction of containers that become wet are not critical in our model, but this lack of sensitivity reflects our coupling of the fraction with a model of focused flow past the containers; an different model might indicate higher sensitivity. Also, the degree of coupling between fracture and matrix flow is important in affecting the times of peak doses but not their magnitudes.

Other critical design assumptions that could lead to reduced and/or delayed doses are a more robust container design, a capillary barrier around each container, the dilution during hydrologie transport from the repository to a potential agricultural community downstream, and the characteristics of an “average” individual in that community who might receive a dose.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1997

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1. Electric Power Research Institute, Yucca Mountain total system performance assessment, Phase 3, EPRI TR-107191, December 1996.Google Scholar
2. Electric Power Research Institute, Biosphere modeling and dose assessment for Yucca Mountain, EPRI TR-107190, Palo Alto, CA, December 1996.Google Scholar
3. Electric Power Research Institute, Analysis and confirmation of robust performance for the flow-diversion barrier system at Yucca Mountain, EPRI TR-107189, November 1996.Google Scholar
4. Risk Engineering, Inc., Demonstration of a risk-based approach to high-level waste repository evaluation, Elec. Power Res. Inst., Rept. NP-7057, Palo Alto, CA, Oct. 1990.Google Scholar
5. Risk Engineering, Inc., Demonstration of a risk-based approach to high-level waste repository evaluation: phase 2, Elec. Power Res. Inst., Rept. TR-1000384, May 1992.Google Scholar
6. Sandia National Laboratories, Total system performance assessment for Yucca Mountain -SNL second iteration (TSPA-1993), SAND93–2675, 2 Vol, Albuquerque, NM, 1994.Google Scholar
7. TRW, Total system performance assessment -1995: an evaluation of the potential Yucca Mountain repository, US Dept. of Energy Rept. B00000000–01717–2200–00136, Rev. 1, Las Vegas, NV, Nov. 1995.Google Scholar