RSC-Programme - Interim Report. Approach and Basis for - Posiva

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Working Report 2009-29RSC-Programme - Interim ReportApproach and Basis for RSC Development, Layout DeterminingFeatures and Preliminary Criteria for Tunnel andDeposition Hole ScalePirjo Hellä, ed.Pöyry Environment OyAntti IkonenSaanio & Riekkola OyJussi MattilaGeological Survey of FinlandTaija Torvela, Liisa WikströmPosiva OyApril 2009Base maps: ©National Land Survey, permission 41/MML/09Working Reports contain information on work in progressor pending completion.
ABSTRACTPosiva Oy, jointly owned by Teollisuuden Voima Oyj, Fortum Power and Heat Oy, isresponsible for implementing the programme for geological disposal of spent nuclearfuel in Finland. The Olkiluoto site has been studied for this purpose for over twodecades. Since 2004, an underground research facility, ONKALO, is being constructedat the site, which will later become a part of the disposal facility. Posiva is preparing tosubmit an application to obtain a construction licence for the disposal facility by the endof 2012.To prepare for the licensing, host rock requirements are being developed to guiderepository design and layout adaptation, as required by the regulators. The RockSuitability Criteria (RSC) programme has been set up for this purpose. The aim of theRSC is to develop a classification scheme both to be applied to the repository layoutdesign and to define suitable rock volumes for the deposition holes. The classificationscheme considers both long-term safety and engineering aspects. Performance targetsfor the host rock consider rock properties relevant to safety, and therefore rockproperties contributing to the function of the host rock as a natural barrier and affectingperformance of the engineered barrier system. Consequently they are related tochemical composition of the groundwater, groundwater flow, groundwater transportproperties and thermomechanical stability.The practical criteria, Rock Suitability Criteria (RSC) based on current site data andmodels, are defined on different scales, including repository, tunnel and deposition holescales. The focus has been in the repository scale. Consequently, layout determiningfeatures (LDFs) and their respect distance volumes that are to be avoided when locatingdeposition tunnels and holes have been defined. Zones defined as LDFs are potentiallymechanically instable in the current or future stress field or they are main groundwaterflow routes important for transport of solutes and chemical stability at the site. The rockconditions at repository level contribute to fulfilment of several performance targets likegroundwater composition, rock mechanics and non-flow related transport properties. Aninitial version of the RSC- criteria, applied in deposition hole location selection,considers LDFs and smaller scale zones and their respect distance volumes, FPI (fullperimeter intersection) fractures and inflow in the deposition hole.Rock suitability criteria and performance and engineering targets, which form thebackground of the criteria, are developed in an iterative manner. Changes may beneeded based on practical testing of the criteria, evaluation of the application of thecriteria to layout design and safety case compilation, as well as new knowledge onperformance of the engineered barriers and site. Future work includes development oftunnel and deposition hole scale criteria, identifying suitable measurement techniquesand developing the predictive modelling procedure to support the application of criteria.Keywords: crystalline bedrock, nuclear waste disposal, KBS-3V, long-term safety,constructability
Page 1: Working Report 2009-29RSC-Programme
Page 5 and 6: PREFACEThis report presents the out
Page 7 and 8: 26 ENGINEERING TARGETS ON HOST ROCK
Page 9 and 10: 4Reference DesignThe discussion in
Page 11 and 12: 6approach is presented in (Chapter
Page 13 and 14: 8shall be estimable and be consider
Page 15 and 16: 10ScaleParametersRepository scaleLa
Page 17 and 18: 12Pilot hole dataThe logging of pil
Page 19 and 20: 14determined on the basis of hydrau
Page 21 and 22: 16understanding of site hydrogeolog
Page 23 and 24: 18ensured to have by design at the
Page 25 and 26: 20SafetyconceptSiteReferenceDesignT
Page 27 and 28: 22Safety functionsPerformancetarget
Page 30 and 31: 254 LONG-TERM SAFETY RELATED REQUIR
Page 32 and 33: 27The above are referred to as the
Page 34 and 35: 29A summary of safety function indi
Page 36 and 37: 31The results by Börgesson and Her
Page 38 and 39: 33Performance target Target value R
Page 40 and 41: 35Even this inflow would need to co
Page 42 and 43: 37form a continuous path along the
Page 44 and 45: 39Performance targets related to ch
Page 46 and 47: 415 DEVELOPMENT OF THE ROCK SUITABI
Page 48 and 49: 43The objectives and the scope of t
Page 50 and 51: 45not only should high transmissive
Page 52 and 53:
47next stage of the project, though
Page 54 and 55:
cumulative percent49100908070Tsum0-
Page 56 and 57:
51Based on the reasoning above, the
Page 58 and 59:
53averagely fractured rock are avoi
Page 60 and 61:
55The utilised borehole data consis
Page 62 and 63:
575.2.4 ResultsLayout determining f
Page 64 and 65:
59The brittle deformation zones BFZ
Page 66 and 67:
61In the future, after increased in
Page 68 and 69:
63Widths of the deterministic influ
Page 70 and 71:
65Determining the influence zone of
Page 73:
68Respect distance volumeFault pair
Page 78 and 79:
735.2.5 Uncertainties in layout det
Page 80 and 81:
75Hydrogeological propertiesPerform
Page 82 and 83:
77Performance target: Limited conce
Page 84 and 85:
79any influence on the behaviour of
Page 86 and 87:
81~ 350 m30252425262320FPIs/100 m15
Page 88 and 89:
83In the post-closure and glacial p
Page 90 and 91:
85the cores of the zones, the T-val
Page 92 and 93:
87example, 100 metres would have an
Page 94 and 95:
89proposed criteria and to the eval
Page 96 and 97:
91needed in order to assess effects
Page 98 and 99:
93The classification process and th
Page 100:
95was based on the latest DFN descr
Page 103 and 104:
98described above. After a discussi
Page 105 and 106:
100and shafts can pass through (as
Page 107 and 108:
102orientation in terms of principa
Page 109 and 110:
104influence zone of the structure.
Page 111 and 112:
106Requirement in the E.5 (Draft 3)
Page 113 and 114:
108be carried out at repository lev
Page 115 and 116:
110hydraulical importance that shou
Page 117 and 118:
112
Page 119 and 120:
114Degueldre, C., Triay, I., Kim, J
Page 121 and 122:
116Milnes, A.G., Aaltonen, I., Kemp
Page 123:
118STUK. 2001. Long-Term Safety of
show all

RSC-Programme - Interim Report. Approach and Basis for - Posiva

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?