415 DEVELOPMENT OF THE ROCK SUITABILITY CRITERIA5.1 <strong>Approach</strong> to the criteria developmentThe following sections present the revised, preliminary criteria (<strong>RSC</strong>-I). The criteriaconsider three scales, the repository scale, the deposition tunnel scale <strong>and</strong> the depositionhole scale. The rock suitability criteria suggested here concentrate on the repositoryscale criteria, applied on the layout-determining features i.e. features affecting theplacement of repository <strong>and</strong> panels. The deposition tunnel <strong>and</strong> deposition hole scalecriteria are still subject to further testing <strong>and</strong> development. The smaller scale criteriaare, nevertheless, briefly addressed <strong>and</strong> some preliminary criteria suggested, althoughthese will be more thoroughly considered during the next phase of <strong>RSC</strong> (<strong>RSC</strong>-II).5.2 Layout-determining features <strong>and</strong> respect distance volumes5.2.1 IntroductionDefinition of layout-determining features <strong>and</strong> respect distance volumes has been guidedabove all by requirements <strong>for</strong>mulated by the Finnish regulatory body, the FinnishRadiation <strong>and</strong> Nuclear Safety Authority (STUK), in Guide YVL 8.4 (STUK 2001), asdescribed in Chapter 2.1. The Guide YVL 8.4 <strong>for</strong>mulates that the structures of the hostrock of importance in the terms of groundwater flow, rock movements or other factorsrelevant to long-term safety, shall be defined <strong>and</strong> classified. The waste canisters shallbe emplaced in the repository so that an adequate distance remains to such majorstructures of the host rock which might constitute fast transport pathways <strong>for</strong> thedisposal <strong>for</strong> the radioactive substances or otherwise impair the per<strong>for</strong>mance of thebarriers. Accordingly, relevant structures called layout determining features need to bedefined together with a respect volume surrounding the feature so that an adequatedistance remains between the relevant structure <strong>and</strong> the deposition holes.Thus, as part of the definition of suitable rock volumes to host the repository, layoutdetermining features <strong>and</strong> their respect volumes are defined as volumes to be avoided bycertain parts of the repository. The rock properties in layout determining features <strong>and</strong>their respect volumes do not meet the per<strong>for</strong>mance targets set with respect to long-termsafety are defined in Chapter 4. In sub-project DETECT-4, The Layout determiningfeatures <strong>and</strong> their respect distances, the main focus has been to define the layoutdetermining features, their influence zones <strong>and</strong> respect volumes (see Figure 3-3 inChapter 3), with respect to these targets. The work was done in close co-operation withsub-project DETECT-3, The Rock Suitability Criteria, where rock suitability criteria <strong>for</strong>the repository host rock were defined (Section 5.3).Layout determining features, including faults, hydrogeological zones <strong>and</strong> boundinglineaments, are usually large in size <strong>and</strong> may have high transmissivity. In the centralpart of the isl<strong>and</strong>, layout determining features have been detected in many boreholes,representing the most certain features at the Olkiluoto site. However, smaller scalede<strong>for</strong>mation zones <strong>and</strong> single, large, hydraulically well conductive fractures also existoutside layout determining features <strong>and</strong> their respect volumes. There are moreuncertainties in the existence, orientation <strong>and</strong> properties of these local featurescompared to layout determining features. The features are not considered to have amajor impact on groundwater flow <strong>and</strong> chemistry, mechanical stability or radionuclidetransport on the site scale. However, locally on the deposition hole scale, they affect
42fulfillment of the per<strong>for</strong>mance targets presented in Table 4.3 in Chapter 4. Thus thesefeatures are considered as part of the rock suitability criteria presented in Section 5.3.Per<strong>for</strong>mance targets <strong>for</strong> the host rock were presented in Chapter 4, Table 4-3. Layoutdetermining features are those where high groundwater flow can cause unfavourablechanges in groundwater chemistry, such as upconing of saline water <strong>and</strong> intrusion ofglacial melt waters, thus affecting many per<strong>for</strong>mance targets related to chemicalcomposition of the groundwater. These high groundwater flow zones provide hardly anytransport resistance <strong>and</strong> should there<strong>for</strong>e be far enough from the deposition holes.Another reason <strong>for</strong> defining a zone as layout determining is to find the potential offuture (post glacial) zone faulting. The project of layout determining features <strong>and</strong>respect distances concerns mainly the following per<strong>for</strong>mance targets <strong>and</strong> their limitvalues. Hence only consideration of layout determining features <strong>and</strong> respect distancevolumes is insufficient to fulfil these per<strong>for</strong>mance targets, but smaller scale criteriapresented in Section 5.3 are also required.Salinity should be less than the target valueo < 70 g/L (TDS, total dissolved solids)Inflow to deposition holes should be less than the target valueo < 0.1 L/min (corresponding to T ~ 10 -9 ...10 -8 m 2 /s <strong>for</strong> single fracture)Flow around deposition holes should be limitedo in the order of 1 L/year (defined as flow over width of 1 m)Transport resistance (WL/Q) in the vicinity of the deposition holes should behigh enougho in the order of few thous<strong>and</strong> of years per metreRock shear in deposition hole should be less than the target valueo < 10 cmRespect distance determines a volume surrounding the layout determining feature thatshould be avoided in order to maintain per<strong>for</strong>mance targets <strong>for</strong> long-term safety of therepository. This volume is called respect distance volume. Defining respect distance <strong>for</strong>a layout determining feature dem<strong>and</strong>s an intermediate step, which is establishing aninfluence zone <strong>for</strong> the feature. Respect distance should be large enough to set a safeenvironment <strong>for</strong> disposal, taking into account the uncertainties in location <strong>and</strong> propertiesof the layout determining features. On the other h<strong>and</strong>, it should be optimised so thatgood rock volumes are not unnecessarily lost. This work is based on the assumption thatvolumes around the faults or hydrogeological zones are the most influenced byde<strong>for</strong>mations <strong>and</strong> are also less competent <strong>for</strong> hosting the deposition holes. This volumeof rock is called an influence zone. The respect distance volume around the fault orhydrogeological zone is basically defined by the influence zone, with a few exceptions.In addition, single faults <strong>and</strong> large fractures, either transmissive or prone to slipping,should be avoided outside the influence zone. This is considered as part of the rocksuitability criteria presented in Section 5.3.
- Page 1 and 2: Working Report 2009-29RSC-Programme
- Page 3 and 4: ABSTRACTPosiva Oy, jointly owned by
- 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 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