Ontario Power Generation's Response to the Joint Review

More documents

Recommendations

Info

OPG’s L&ILW Deep Geologic Repository Project Tracking Tables for IR Responses, Design Updates and Corrections, Rev.3 Section/Figure/Table in Document Sec. 3.2.1.2 Rock Mass Properties Sec. 3.2.1.3 Short-term Behaviour Geosynthesis (NWMO DGR-TR-2011-11 R000) Information Type Scope of New Information Information Source CEAA Registry Item Response to Information Requests Response to Information Requests Sec. 3.2.2.1 Intact Rock Response to Information Requests Fig. 3.14 UCS of the Queenston Formation (a) and Georgian Bay Formation Shales (b) Response to Information Requests Sec. 3.2.3.1 Intact Rock Response to Information Requests Table 3.14 Summary of Laboratory Geomechanical Properties in MS Units 1 to 5) Response to Information Requests Provides clarification of evidence for the overall integrity of the Cobourg Formation at the DGR site Provides clarification on drill and blast techniques used in the development of the Darlington tunnel Provides clarification of the description and tabulation of Poisson’s ratio parameters Provides clarification on data used in determining core strength of the Georgian Bay formation Provides clarification of the description and tabulation of Poisson’s ratio parameters Provides clarification on data used in determining core strength of the Georgian Bay formation Provides clarification on the variance in strength data for the Cobourg Formation Provides clarification of the description and tabulation of Poisson’s ratio parameters Response to IR-EIS-03-72 in OPG Response to IR Package #3 Letter dated Jul.9, 2012 [5] Response to IR-EIS-03-52 in OPG Response to IR Package #3 Letter dated Jul.9, 2012 [5] Response to IR-EIS-03-68 in OPG Response to IR Package #3 Letter dated Jul.9, 2012 [5] Response to IR-EIS-03-68 in OPG Response to IR Package #3 Letter dated Jul.9, 2012 [5] Response to IR-EIS-03-68 in OPG Response to IR Package #3 Letter dated Jul.9, 2012 [5] Response to IR-EIS-03-68 in OPG Response to IR Package #3 Letter dated Jul.9, 2012 [5] Response to IR-EIS-03-68 in OPG Response to IR Package #3 Letter dated Jul.9, 2012 [5] Response to IR-EIS-03-68 in OPG Response to IR Package #3 Letter dated Jul.9, 2012 [5] 608 608 608 608 608 608 608 608 Page 110 of 138 New
OPG’s L&ILW Deep Geologic Repository Project Tracking Tables for IR Responses, Design Updates and Corrections, Rev.3 Section/Figure/Table in Document Sec. 4.5 Illustrative Modelling of the Bruce Nuclear Site Geochemistry Sec. 4.5.1.1 The Ordovician Tracer Profiles: Diffusion-fromabove Geosynthesis (NWMO DGR-TR-2011-11 R000) Information Type Scope of New Information Information Source CEAA Registry Item Response to Information Requests Response to Information Requests Ch. 5 Hydrogeology Response to Information Requests Sec. 5.3.5 Diffusion Properties Response to Information Requests Provides clarification on the effects of glaciation on the repository Provides clarification on confidence in groundwater system behaviour and performance Provides clarification on the effects of glaciation on the repository Provides justification for the proposed conceptual model of solute transport Provides clarification of evidence for the overall integrity of the Cobourg Formation at the DGR site Provides clarification as to how the hydraulic parameters used to represent the shale formations in the hydrogeologic modelling were derived Provides justification for the hydrogeologic modelling discretization with respect to the Guelph and Salina A1 Unit aquifers Provides discussion of diffusion coefficients determined for the selected tracers (HTO and NaI) Response to IR-EIS-01-17 in OPG Response to IR Package #1 Letter dated Mar.9, 2012 [3] Response to IR-EIS-03-92 in OPG Response to IR Package #3 Letter dated Jul.9, 2012 [5] Submission of supplementary material to IR Package #1 Response to IR-EIS-01-17 Letter dated Jul.10, 2012 [6] Response to IR-EIS-04-128 in OPG Response to IR Package #4 Letter dated Sep.6, 2012 [11] Response to IR-EIS-03-72 in OPG Response to IR Package #3 Letter dated Jul.9, 2012 [5] Response to IR-EIS-04-125 in OPG Response to IR Package #4 Letter dated Sep.6, 2012 [11] Response to IR-EIS-02-35 in OPG Response to IR Package #2 Letter dated Jun.1, 2012 [4] 363 608 606 Page 111 of 138 New 725 � 608 725 � 523
Page 2 and 3:
Dr. Stella Swanson September 28, 20
Page 4 and 5:
Attachment 1 to OPG letter, Albert
Page 6 and 7:
Page 8 and 9:
Page 10 and 11:
Page 12 and 13:
Page 14 and 15:
Page 16 and 17:
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21:
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
Page 50 and 51:
Page 52 and 53:
Page 54 and 55:
Page 56 and 57:
Page 58 and 59:
Page 60 and 61:
Page 62 and 63:
Page 64 and 65:
Page 66 and 67:
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71:
Page 72 and 73:
Page 74 and 75:
Title: OPG’s Deep Geologic Reposi
Page 76 and 77:
Table of Contents CLOSURE WALL CAPA
Page 78 and 79:
Figure 1: Access tunnel geometry. C
Page 80 and 81:
CLOSURE WALL CAPACITY and are the s
Page 82 and 83:
CLOSURE WALL CAPACITY The shear str
Page 84 and 85:
(H-a) = 4.25 m Figure 5: Return air
Page 86 and 87:
Golder Associates Ltd. 6700 Century
Page 88 and 89:
Title: Potential Inflows through Cr
Page 90 and 91:
Serge Clement 1011170042-TM-G2100-0
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
APPENDIX A Derivation of Conversion
Page 102 and 103:
External radius of liner =
Page 104 and 105:
ATTACHMENT 2 Attachment to OPG lett
Page 106 and 107:
8. Letter from A. Sweetnam to S. Sw
Page 108 and 109:
OPG’s L&ILW Deep Geologic Reposit
Page 110 and 111:
Page 112 and 113:
Page 114 and 115:
Page 116 and 117:
Page 118 and 119:
Page 120 and 121:
Page 122 and 123:
Page 124 and 125:
Page 126 and 127:
Page 128 and 129:
Page 130 and 131:
Page 132 and 133:
Page 134 and 135:
Page 136 and 137:
Page 138 and 139:
Page 140 and 141:
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148 and 149:
Page 150 and 151:
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156 and 157:
Page 158 and 159:
Page 160 and 161:
Page 162 and 163:
Page 164 and 165: OPG’s L&ILW Deep Geologic Reposit
Page 242: OPG’s L&ILW Deep Geologic Reposit
show all

Ontario Power Generation's Response to the Joint Review

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?