23.04.2013 Views

Management of Commercially Generated Radioactive Waste - U.S. ...

Management of Commercially Generated Radioactive Waste - U.S. ...

Management of Commercially Generated Radioactive Waste - U.S. ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Response<br />

231<br />

GEOLOGIC CONSIDERATIONS<br />

The table in question has been deleted. The reader is referred to Table B.2.1 <strong>of</strong> final<br />

Appendix B. The data cited for salt do bound the range <strong>of</strong> values one would expect for both<br />

bedded and domed salt.<br />

The other properties requested by the commenter can be derived from those presented.<br />

Draft p. 3.1.14<br />

Issue<br />

The table showing the isolation <strong>of</strong> various rock types has basalt listed as having the<br />

highest rating for the quality <strong>of</strong> permeability. This may be true on a laboratory specimen,<br />

but it is not true on a large scale. According to Meinzer (1942), <strong>of</strong> the 65 first magni-<br />

tude springs in the United States, 38 come from basalt rocks. (214)<br />

Response<br />

When considering a sequence <strong>of</strong> basalt it is true that permeability may indeed be high<br />

as a result <strong>of</strong> sedimentary interbeds. What is intended however, is for the repository to<br />

be located in a single, thick, coherent layer <strong>of</strong> basalt rather than situated such that it<br />

intersects or crosses these interbeds. Bulk rock properties are therefore the best approx-<br />

imation <strong>of</strong> the characteristecs <strong>of</strong> this thick rock layer. The comparison <strong>of</strong> media proper-<br />

ties on draft p. 3.1.14 are based on laboratory testing <strong>of</strong> small rock samples which<br />

represent these bulk rock properties<br />

Draft p. 3.1.14 and DOE/ET-0028, p. 7.2.13<br />

Issue<br />

Figures 3.1.4 and 7.2.4 are incorrectly referenced, are incorrect and misleading:<br />

1. They fail to show some <strong>of</strong> the other basalt areas which should be assessed as candidates<br />

for deep geological burial <strong>of</strong> HLW, e.g., Colorado Plateau, Rio Grande Valley, San Juan<br />

Mts. <strong>of</strong> Colorado, Snake River Plains, Triassic Basins <strong>of</strong> the Carolinas, Virginia and<br />

Pennsylvania.<br />

2. The Keweenawan Series is misplotted as is the Triassic <strong>of</strong> N.J. and Connecticut. This<br />

is not suprising as the map <strong>of</strong> the Keweenawan which was supposedly used in compiling<br />

this map (Y/OWI/TM 36/7, Figure 3-1) is illegible.<br />

3. Reference Y/OWI/TM 36/7 is cited as a source <strong>of</strong> information for the location <strong>of</strong> the<br />

Triassic "Lavas." There is no information on the Triassic in this publication.<br />

4. The expression Keweenawan and Triassic "Lavas" is misleading, as many <strong>of</strong> these basalts<br />

are not extrusive igneous rocks, e.g., Palisades Sill.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!