Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model Rev 01, ICN 00

ANL-NBS-MD-000010

October 2004

1. PURPOSE 
This analysis is designed to use existing modeling and analysis results as the basis for estimated 
groundwater flow rates into the saturated zone (SZ) site-scale model domains, both as recharge 
(infiltration) at the upper boundary (water table), and as underflow at the lateral boundaries. 
Specifically, this work compiles information on the recharge boundary conditions supplied to the 
base-case and alternate SZ site-scale flow models taken from (1) distributed recharge from the 
1997 (DAgnese et al. 1997 [DIRS 100131]) or 2001 (DAgnese et al. 2002 [DIRS 158876]) SZ 
regional-scale (Death Valley Regional Flow System [DVRFS]) model; (2) recharge below the 
area of the 1997 (Wu et al. 1997 [DIRS 156453]) or 2003 (BSC 2004 [DIRS 169861]) 
unsaturated zone (UZ) site-scale flow model; and (3) focused recharge along Fortymile Wash. 
In addition, this analysis includes extraction of the groundwater flow rates simulated by the 1997 
and 2001 DVRFS models coincident with the lateral boundaries of the SZ site-scale flow 
models. The fluxes from the 1997 DVRFS were used to calibrate the base-case SZ site-scale 
flow model. The 2001 DVRFS fluxes are used in the alternate SZ site-scale flow model. 
The purpose of this scientific analysis report is threefold: 
1. To redo the analysis performed in Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary 
Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and Transport Model (BSC 2001 
[DIRS 164648]) with qualified software codes. In addition, this Scientific Analysis 
Report demonstrates that results generated in the previous revision of the report 
(BSC 2001 [DIRS 164648]), while different from those generated here with qualified 
codes, do not adversely impact input, calibration, or output relating to the base-case 
SZ site-scale flow model (BSC 2004 [DIRS 170037]). All data generated in this 
report relating to 1997 DVRFS model and 1997 UZ site-scale flow model results 
correspond to those discussed by BSC (2001 [DIRS 164648]), although any errors in 
that analysis are corrected. 
2. To extract updated output data from the 2001 DVRFS model and 2003 UZ site-scale 
flow model that areused as boundary condition inputs to the alternate SZ site-scale 
flow model. Although these updated data differ from those discussed by both BSC 
(2001 [DIRS 164648]) and this report (Item 1 above), they are conceptually 
equivalent: both specify surface recharge boundary conditions and lateral recharge 
boundary condition targets for the SZ site-scale flow models. 
3. To identify differences between Items 1 and 2 above. Specifically, this report will 
quantitatively assess differences between recharge and lateral boundary fluxes used in 
the base-case SZ site-scale flow model for license application (LA) and those used in 
the alternate SZ site-scale flow model. 
The Bechtel SAIC Company, LLC, Technical Work Plan for: Natural System - Saturated Zone 
Analysis and Model Report Integration (BSC 2004 [DIRS 171421]) governs this scientific 
analysis report. The work documented in this report was conducted in accordance with the 
quality assurance procedure, AP-SIII.9Q, Scientific Analyses. Table 1-1 lists the models 
referenced in this report. In addition, this work should be limited in application only to 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 1-2 October 2004 
developing the distributed recharge and lateral flux boundary conditions for the base-case and 
alternate SZ site-scale flow models. 
Table 1-1. Models Used in this Analysis Report (AMR) (References and DIRS Numbers) 
Name Reference DIRS 
1997 DVRFS DAgnese et al. 1997 100131 
2001 DVRFS DAgnese et al. 2002 158876 
1997 UZ site-scale flow model Wu et al. 1997 156453 
2003 UZ site-scale flow model BSC 2004 169861 
Figure 1-1 shows the relationship of this report to other reports that also pertain to flow and 
transport in the SZ. Figure 1-1 also shows the flow of key information among the SZ reports. It 
should be noted that Figure 1-1 does not contain a complete representation of the data and 
parameter inputs and outputs of all SZ reports, nor does it show inputs external to this suite of SZ 
reports. The primary output from this report is a direct feed to the SZ site-scale flow model in the 
form of groundwater flow boundary conditions. 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 1-3 October 2004 
NOTE: This figure is a simplified representation of the flow of information among SZ reports. See the DIRS of each 
report for a complete listing of data and parameter inputs. This figure does not show inputs external to this 
suite of SZ reports. 
Figure 1-1. Generalized Flow of Information Among Reports Pertaining to Flow and Transport in the SZ 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 1-4 October 2004 
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 2-1 October 2004 
2. QUALITY ASSURANCE 
Development of this scientific analysis and the supporting modeling activities is subject to the 
Yucca Mountain Project (YMP) quality assurance (QA) program as indicated in the technical 
work plan (TWP) (BSC 2004 [DIRS 171421]). Approved QA procedures have been used to 
conduct and document the activities described in this Scientific analysis report. The TWP also 
identifies the methods used to control the electronic management of data (BSC 2004 
[DIRS 171421]). 
This scientific analysis report provides model calibration boundary values for the base-case and 
alternate SZ site-scale flow models. In addition, it follows the guidelines outlined in the 
technical work plan (BSC 2004 [DIRS 171421]). The SZ is part of the natural barrier below the 
repository and it is classified as Category 1 with regard to importance to waste isolation, as 
defined in AP-2.22Q, Classification Analyses and Maintenance of the Q-List. The report 
contributes to the analysis and modeling data used to support performance assessment; the 
conclusions do not directly affect engineered features important to safety, as defined in 
AP-2.22Q. 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 2-2 October 2004 
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 October 2004 3-1 
3. USE OF SOFTWARE 
The software codes used in this analysis are discussed in Sections 3.1 and 3.2. In addition, the 
following industry standard software was used in this analysis and documentation: 
 Microsoft Excel 2000 and Surfer 6.03 
Microsoft Excel 2000 was used for spreadsheet calculations using standard functions. Surfer 6.03 
was used for plotting and visualization of analysis results in the figures included in this report. 
Specific applications are discussed in Section 6. Both are exempt software products in 
accordance with LP-SI.11Q, Software Management. 
3.1 RECHARGE 
All codes used to synthesize the estimates of recharge for the boundary conditions of the SZ 
site-scale model are found in the Software Configuration Management System. Microsoft Excel 
spreadsheets are used to combine components from flow models and other sources. 
3.1.1 Distributed Recharge from the DVRFS Models 
A set of software routines is used to extract the distributed recharge from the 1997 or 2001 
DVRFS model and to write the recharge values for input to the SZ site-scale flow model. The 
Excel file, read rchg from MFP.xls, is used to calculate distributed recharge applied to the 
base-case SZ flow model from the 1997 DVRFS model. The use of software routines, 
Xread_Distr_Rech (V 1.0 STN: 10960-1.0-00 [DIRS 163074]) and Xread_Distr_Rech_-UZ 
(V 1.0 STN: 10961-1.0-00 [DIRS 163075]), is discussed in Section 6. In addition, for the 2001 
DVRFS model, the codes Zone (V 1.0 STN: 10957-1.0-00 [DIRS 163078]), EXT_RECH (V 1.0 
STN: 10958-1.0-00 [DIRS 163072]), and Mult_rech (V 1.0 STN: 10959-1.0-00 [DIRS 163073]) 
are used to extract distributed recharge from 2001 DVRFS flow model input and output files. 
All of these codes are simple utility codes that read data files, perform any necessary conversions 
or reorganizations, and then write output files. In addition, they were written explicitly for use in 
this analysis. These codes are for use on a personal computer (PC) running a Windows operating 
system and were baselined on December 11, 2002. 
3.1.2 Recharge from the UZ Site-scale Flow Model Area 
A Microsoft Excel spreadsheet is used to perform calculations and unit conversions of data 
extracted from the output files of the 1997 or 2003 UZ site-scale flow model. To combine the 
output from the 1997 or 2003 UZ site-scale flow model with the other components of recharge, 
the location coordinates from the UZ site-scale flow model are converted from the Nevada State 
Plane coordinate system to the Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) coordinate system with 
CORPSCON (V 5.11.08 STN: 10547-5.11.08-00 [DIRS 155082]). 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 October 2004 3-2 
3.1.3 Focused Recharge from Fortymile Wash 
A software routine, Xread_Reaches (V 1.0 STN: 10962-1.0-00 [DIRS 163076]), is used to 
designate recharge through Fortymile Wash and to superimpose these values on the distributed 
recharge from the 1997 or 2001 DVRFS model, as discussed in Section 6. 
A software routine, Xwrite_Flow_New (V 1.0-125 STN: 10963-1.0-125-00 [DIRS 163077]), is 
used to superimpose the values of recharge from the three recharge components for use in the SZ 
site-scale flow models, as discussed in Section 6. These codes were written explicitly for use in 
this analysis report. 
3.2 LATERAL BOUNDARIES 
Microsoft Excel spreadsheets are used to compile simulated groundwater flux values from the 
1997 and 2001 DVRFS models. 
The 1997 DVRFS model results are calculated using MODFLOWP. The executable for 
MODFLOWP (V 2.3 STN: 10144-2.3-00 [DIRS 150454]) was obtained from the Software 
Configuration Management System and a set of input files was obtained from the Technical Data 
Management System (TDMS) directory GS960808312144.003/milrep/finalmod/ [DIRS 105121] 
and copied to a Sun workstation running Solaris 7. Files needed to perform the analyses in this 
Scientific Analysis Report were obtained from TDMS (DTN: GS960808312144.003 
[DIRS 105121]). To extract flow terms from the output of MODFLOWP for the lateral 
boundaries of the 1997 DVRFS model, the routine, Extract (V 1.0 STN: 10955-1.0-00 
[DIRS 163070]), which was written specifically for this analysis report, was used as discussed in 
Section 6. 
The 2001 DVRFS model results were calculated using MODFLOW-2000 (Harbaugh et al. 2000 
[DIRS 155197]). All files needed to perform the analyses in this Scientific Analysis Report were 
obtained from DTN: GS040308312144.001 [DIRS 171472]). To extract flow terms from the 
output of MODFLOW-2000 for the lateral boundaries of the 2001 DVRFS model, the routine 
Extract (V 1.1 STN: 10955-1.1-00 [DIRS 163071]), written specifically for this analysis report, 
was used as discussed in Section 6. 
All software codes used in this analysis, whether commercial off-the-shelf or written specifically 
for this analysis, are appropriate for the analyses performed here. All functions used in 
spreadsheet calculations are standard to the software. At the time of their use, MODFLOWP and 
MODFLOW-2000 were the current industry standard for groundwater flow calculations. 
Table 3-1 is a list of all codes written specifically for this analysis report and Table 3-2 is a list of 
other codes used, but not written specifically for, this analysis. 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 October 2004 3-3 
Table 3-1. Codes Written Specifically for Use in this Analysis 
Code Platform/System DIRS 
Extract V 1.0 PC/Windows 163070 
Extract V 1.1 PC/Windows 163071 
EXT_RECH V 1.0 PC/Windows 163072 
Mult_rech V 1.0 PC/Windows 163073 
Xread_Distr_Rech V 1.0 PC/Windows 163074 
Xread_Distr_Rech_-UZ V 1.0 PC/Windows 163075 
Xread_Reaches V 1.0 PC/Windows 163076 
Xwrite_Flow_New V 1.0 PC/Windows 163077 
Zone V 1.0 PC/Windows 163078 
Table 3-2. Codes Used in this Analysis 
Code Platform/System DIRS 
CORPSCON V 5.11.08 PC/Windows 155082 
MODFLOWP V 2.3 Sun/Solaris 7 150454 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 October 2004 3-4 
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 October 2004 4-1 
4. INPUTS 
4.1 DIRECT INPUTS 
4.1.1 Fortymile Wash 
Focused recharge data for Fortymile Wash are recorded in DTN: MO0102DQRGWREC.001 
[DIRS 155523]. 
4.1.2 1997 DVRFS Model and 1997 UZ Site-Scale Flow Model 
Input information used in this analysis comes from several sources, which are summarized in 
Table 4-1. DTN: GS960808312144.003 [DIRS 105121] contains inputs and outputs from the 
1997 DVRFS model (DAgnese et al. 1997 [DIRS 100131]). Recharge data from the 1997 UZ 
site-scale flow model are output from a preliminary YMP UZ model and are taken to be 
representative of site conditions. This use of 1997 UZ site-scale flow model data is further 
discussed in Section 6.2.2.1 (DTN: LB971212001254.001 [DIRS 104749]). Both of these DTNs 
are qualified for one-time use in Appendices B and C of this report. 
Table 4-1. Input Data Sources 1997 Models 
Data Set Data Description Data Tracking Number 
Distributed recharge files: 
aap.fix2, dvparwel14, 
rechs13fix3.asc 
Recharge input files from 
the 1997 DVRFS model 
GS960808312144.003 
[DIRS 105121] 
Qualified in this report 
Recharge from 1997 UZ 
site-scale flow model area 
files: mnaqb_p.out and 
mesh_bas.2k 
Output files from the 1997 
UZ site-scale flow model 
containing outflow to SZ 
and mesh coordinates 
LB971212001254.001 
[DIRS 104749] 
Qualified in this report 
Groundwater flow at 
lateral boundaries files: 
MODFLOWP, aap.fix2, 
baspcnst.pahdvfix5, 
bcfp2, cnsthd1new, 
cnsthd2new, cnsthd3new, 
drnp, dvparwel14, 
etmpar, flows.new, 
ghbp4, heads.sum5.spr, 
lay1str170.asc, 
lay2str170.asc, 
lay3str170.asc, 
newfinnd.evt, otc, pcg2, 
rchp, rechs13fix3.asc, 
and welp 
MODFLOWP executable 
and input files from the 
1997 DVRFS model 
GS960808312144.003 
[DIRS 105121] 
Qualified in this report 
Focused recharge from 
Fortymile Wash 
Estimates of recharge 
along four reaches of 
Fortymile Wash 
MO0102DQRGWREC.001 
[DIRS 155523] 
NOTE: SZ = saturated zone; UZ = unsaturated zone. 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 October 2004 4-2 
4.1.3 2001 DVRFS Model and 2003 UZ Site-Scale Flow Model 
Input information used in this analysis comes from several sources that are summarized in 
Table 4-2. DTN: GS040308312144.001 [DIRS 171472]) contains inputs and outputs from the 
2001 DVRFS model. Recharge data from the 2003 UZ site-scale flow model are output from a 
YMP model and are taken to be representative of site conditions. DTN: LB03023DSSCP9I.001 
[DIRS: 163044] contains the output from the 2003 UZ site-scale flow model. 
Table 4-2. Input Data Sources 2001 and 2003 Models 
Data Set Data Description Source 
Distributed recharge files: 
rechg.asc, 
rch_zone6.asc, RCH.txt, 
SEN.txt 
Recharge, zone 
designation, and recharge 
multipliers input files from 
2001 DVRFS model 
GS040308312144.001 
[DIRS 171472] 
Recharge from 2003 UZ 
site-scale flow model area 
files: 
flow9.dat_preq_mA.dat 
and mesh_2kn.v1 
Output files from 2003 UZ 
site-scale flow model 
containing outflow to SZ 
and mesh coordinates 
LB03023DSSCP9I.001 
[DIRS 163044] 
Groundwater flow at 
lateral boundaries file: 
CBCF.asc 
MODFLOW-2000 output 
file from 2001 DVRFS 
model 
GS040308312144.001 
[DIRS 171472] 
Focused recharge from 
Fortymile Wash 
Estimates of recharge 
along four reaches of 
Fortymile Wash 
MO0102DQRGWREC.001 
[DIRS 155523] 
The data on distributed recharge and lateral fluxes supplied to the alternate SZ site-scale flow 
model from DTN: GS040308312144.001 [DIRS 171472] are obtained from an outside source 
and are not established fact. Specifically, the comment section for this data package states that, 
This model was not developed entirely within the controls of [the Yucca Mountain Site 
Characterization Project] and is therefore considered unqualified and a non-YMP product. The 
suitability of these data is justified for use in this specific application, as outlined in Scientific 
Analyses (AP-SIII.9Q, Section 5.2.1). U. S. Department of Energy (DOE) partially directed the 
development of this model as part of the characterization of Yucca Mountain and surrounding 
regions. This model output is the updated version and conceptual equivalent of the 1997 DVRFS 
model output (DTN: GS960808312144.003 [DIRS 105121]), which was a YMP product, and is 
qualified for one time use in this analysis report in Appendix B. Following the same arguments 
in Appendix B, these data are appropriate for use in this scientific analysis because they were 
developed with the best methods and practices of the time by the United States Geological 
Survey (USGS) professional geologists and scientists. Distributed recharge and lateral flux data 
generally are corroborated by comparison with the 1997 DVRFS, although it must be noted that 
the 1997 DVRFS model represents conditions in the early 1990s and the 2001 DVRFS model 
represents predevelopment conditions. 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 October 2004 4-3 
4.2 CRITERIA 
The licensing criteria for postclosure performance assessment are stated in 10 CFR 63 
[DIRS 156605]. The requirements to be satisfied by TSPA are identified in the Yucca Mountain 
Project Requirements Document (Canori and Leitner 2003 [DIRS 166275]). The acceptance 
criteria that will be used by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission to determine whether the 
technical requirements for this model report have been met are identified in Yucca Mountain 
Review Plan, Final Report (YMRP) (NRC 2003 [DIRS 163274]). The pertinent requirements 
and criteria for this model report are summarized in Table 4-5. 
Table 4-3. Project Requirements and Yucca Mountain Review Plan Acceptance Criteria Applicable to 
This Model Report 
Requirement 
Number Requirement Titlea 
10 CFR 63 
Linkb Applicable Criteriac 
PRD-002/T-015 Requirements for 
Performance Assessment 
10 CFR 63.114 
[DIRS 156605] 
2.2.1.3.8.3, Criteria 1 and 2 
a From Canori and Leitner 2003 [DIRS 166275]). 
b 10 CFR 63 [DIRS 156605]. 
c From NRC (2003 [DIRS 163274]), Section 2.2.1.3.8.3. 
In this section, the acceptance criteria identified in Section 2.2.1.3.8.3 of the YMRP (NRC 2003 
[DIRS 163274]) are given below. In cases where subsidiary criteria are listed in the YMRP for a 
given criterion, only the subsidiary criteria addressed by this model report are listed below. 
Where a subcriterion includes several components, only some of those components may be 
addressed. How these components are addressed is summarized in Section 8.3 of this report. 
Acceptance Criteria from Section 2.2.1.3.8.3 Flow Paths in the Saturated Zone 
Acceptance Criterion 1: System Description and Model Integration Are Adequate. 
(1) Total system performance assessment adequately incorporates important design features, 
physical phenomena, and couplings, and uses consistent and appropriate assumptions, 
throughout the flow paths in the saturated zone abstraction process. 
(2) The description of the aspects of hydrology, geology, geochemistry, design features, physical 
phenomena, and couplings, that may affect flow paths in the SZ, is adequate. Conditions and 
assumptions in the abstraction of flow paths in the SZ are readily identified, and consistent with 
the body of data presented in the description. 
(4) Boundary and initial conditions used in the total system performance assessment abstraction 
of flow paths in the SZ are propagated throughout its abstraction approaches. For example, 
abstractions are based on initial and boundary conditions consistent with site-scale modeling and 
regional models of the Death Valley Regional Flow System. 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 October 2004 4-4 
(10) Guidance in NUREG1297 (Altman et al. 1988 [DIRS 103597]) and NUREG1298 
(Altman et al., 1988 [DIRS 103750])), or other acceptable approaches for peer review and data 
qualification is followed. 
Acceptance Criterion 2: Data Are Sufficient for Model Justification. 
(1) Geological, hydrological, and geochemical values used in the license application to evaluate 
flow paths in the SZ are adequately justified. Adequate descriptions of how the data were used, 
interpreted, and appropriately synthesized into the parameters are provided. 
(2) Sufficient data have been collected on the natural system to establish initial and boundary 
conditions for the abstraction of flow paths in the SZ. 
(3) Data on the geology, hydrology, and geochemistry of the SZ used in the total system 
performance assessment abstraction are based on appropriate techniques. These techniques may 
include laboratory experiments, site-specific field measurements, natural analogue research, and 
process-level modeling studies. As appropriate, sensitivity or uncertainty analyses, used to 
support the U.S. Department of Energy total system performance assessment abstraction, are 
adequate to determine the possible need for additional data. 
(4) Sufficient information is provided to substantiate that the proposed mathematical 
groundwater modeling approach and proposed model(s) are calibrated and applicable to site 
conditions. 
4.3 CODES, STANDARDS, AND REGULATIONS 
No codes, standards, or regulations other than those identified in the Project Requirements 
Document (Canori and Leitner 2003 [DIRS 166275], Table 2-3) and determined to be applicable 
(Table 4-2) were used in this analysis. 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 5-1 October 2004 
5. ASSUMPTIONS 
5.1 DISTRIBUTED RECHARGE FROM THE 1997 AND 2003 UZ SITE-SCALE FLOW 
MODEL AREAS 
The patterns of recharge are taken from the bottom boundaries of the 1997 and 2003 UZ 
site-scale flow model in the area of the SZ site-scale flow model. The output and grid files used 
in this Scientific Analysis Report were taken from DTN: LB971212001254.001 [DIRS 104749] 
and LB03023DSSCP9I.001 [DIRS: 163044]. These files provided an estimate of recharge to the 
SZ within the footprint of the 1997 or 2003 UZ site-scale flow model, respectively. Data in 
DTN: LB971212001254.001 [DIRS 104749] are qualified for one-time use in Appendix C. 
Both the 1997 and 2003 UZ site-scale flow models have variable grid resolutions that are 
generally finer than the grid resolution for the SZ site-scale flow models. Integration of recharge 
fluxes extracted from the 1997 or 2003 UZ site-scale flow model for use at the grid resolution of 
the SZ site-scale flow models is assumed adequate to represent the recharge pattern in this area. 
The infiltration parameters employed in the 1997 and 2003 UZ site-scale flow model differ in 
resolution and conceptual basis from the recharge model used in the DVRFS models. This 
inconsistency is assumed insignificant when calibrating the SZ site-scale flow models. In 
addition, the 1997 and 2003 UZ site-scale flow models results used in this analysis are from the 
expected (base) case among several alternative models that consider uncertainty in the 
infiltration flux and UZ site-scale flow model parameters. It is assumed that the expected cases 
of the 1997 and 2003 UZ site-scale flow models are the most representative estimates to use for 
the recharge analyses. These assumptions are used in Section 6.2.2.1. 
In this analysis, it is assumed that the three components of recharge (i.e., distributed recharge 
from the 1997 or 2001 DVRFS model, recharge from the 1997 or 2003 UZ site-scale flow 
model, and focused recharge from Fortymile Wash) provide a reasonable estimate of the 
magnitude and spatial pattern of recharge when combined. In particular, it is assumed that the 
resulting estimate of groundwater recharge is suitable and adequate for the purposes of model 
calibration for the SZ site-scale flow models. Although the estimates of recharge for the three 
different components of the analysis were derived by different methods, it is assumed that the 
results are sufficiently consistent for the purposes of specifying infiltration into the SZ site-scale 
flow models. This assumption is considered appropriate and sufficient for this analysis because 
the total volumetric recharge rate within the SZ site-scale model domains is a relatively small 
fraction of the total volumetric groundwater flow rate through the domains (see Sections 6.5.1 
and 6.5.2). That makes the analysis quite insensitive to any reasonable assumptions about 
recharge. Mass balance errors are inherently introduced by using recharge estimates from three 
different sources at the surface of the flow models while using only one of these sources for 
lateral boundary fluxes. However, mass balance is ensured in the SZ site-scale flow models by 
using the lateral fluxes as calibration targets instead of fixed boundary conditions. Furthermore, 
the active pumping wells located within the base-case SZ flow model domain incorporated into 
the 1997 DVRFS model are not taken into account directly. Although this may appear to be a 
discrepancy, it is assumed that the base-case SZ site-scale flow model takes drawdown due to 
these pumping wells into account by calibrating to the resulting heads and increasing the flux 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 5-2 October 2004 
through the southern boundary such that a mass balance is achieved (see Section 6.7.2). In 
Appendix B, a one-time qualification is made for DTN: GS960808312144.003 [DIRS 105121] 
for use in this report only. In addition, it should be noted that the bottom boundary of the SZ 
site-scale flow model domain is a no-flow boundary. Finally, because the bottoms of the UZ 
site-scale flow models models do not exactly correspond the the tops of the SZ site-scale flow 
models, it is assumed that there is no lateral flow over significant distances in the UZ that diverts 
recharge into cells at the surface of the SZ model that are in different x-y locations than the cells 
that directly underlie the recharge locations in the DVRFS models or in Fortymile Wash. 
The overarching assumption of this analysis is that the best way to constrain SZ site-scale flow 
models is to extract lateral and recharge fluxes from other models and analyses (DVRFS models, 
UZ site-scale flow models, and data from Fortymile Wash) and apply these as either boundary 
conditions or calibration targets. Implicit in this assumption is that these modeled values are 
more representative than fluxes calculated from local measurements of hydraulic conductivity 
and hydraulic gradient. Because of the paucity of these data near the site-scale model 
boundaries, this is a necessary and reasonable assumption. Although some data can be 
extrapolated to estimate portions of the flow through the boundaries of the site-scale model 
domain, the sheer magnitude of the area for which boundary conditions are to be specified 
(412.5 km2) precludes these values from being specified through data collection activities. 
Finally, it is assumed that all of the underlying assumptions in the models used to prescribe 
distributed recharge and lateral flux boundary conditions for he SZ site-scale flow models are 
sufficient. 
5.2 FOCUSED RECHARGE FROM FORTYMILE WASH 
The estimates of recharge from the Fortymile Wash channel were taken from 
DTN: MO0102DQRGWREC.001 [DIRS 155523] and are based on streamflow losses during 
brief runoff events over a maximum of 26 years (Savard 1998 [DIRS 102213]). It is assumed 
that those observations are representative of the long-term recharge from this source. This is 
reasonable because the SZ site-scale model is designed to model current conditions extrapolated 
into the future. The specific scenario of a wetter climate is examined through modeling of a 
decreased depth to the water table and is not within the scope of this analysis. The estimates of 
recharge for the Fortymile Canyon reach and the Amargosa Desert reach are extrapolated and 
interpolated, respectively, to estimate the recharge rates for reaches of the wash within the area 
of the SZ site-scale models (see Section 6.2.3). It is assumed that the recharge is uniform along 
each of the stream reaches and that the effective width of the Fortymile Wash channel for 
recharge at the water table is 500 m. It is also assumed that recharge is uniformly distributed 
over the area of the distributary channels of Fortymile Wash in the Amargosa Desert. These 
assumptions are reasonable because of the relatively small total groundwater contribution from 
the focused recharge along Fortymile Wash relative to the distributed recharge model (see 
Section 6.4.3). There are no updated data for focused recharge from Fortymile Wash; thus, only 
one data set is considered. 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 6-1 October 2004 
6. SCIENTIFIC ANALYSIS DISCUSSION 
This section is organized as follows: Section 6.1 describes important FEPs related to this 
scientific analysis. Section 6.2 and subsections describe the methods used to extract the 
distributed recharge from: (1) the 1997 and 2001 DVRFS models; (2) the 1997 and 2003 UZ 
site-scale models; and (3) Fortymile Wash, as well as how these values are combined. 
Section 6.3 and subsections describe the methods used to extract the lateral fluxes from the 1997 
and 2001 DVRFS models. Sections 6.4 and 6.5 present the distributed recharge and lateral flux 
results, respectively. Section 6.6 compares these new results to the previous results of BSC 
(2001 [DIRS 164648]). Finally, Section 6.7 is an impact analysis of how applying the updated 
distributed recharge and lateral boundary fluxes impact the base-case SZ site-scale flow model. 
6.1 FEATURES, EVENTS, AND PROCESSES SUPPORTED BY THIS SCIENTIFIC 
ANALYSIS 
As stipulated in Technical Work Plan For: Natural System - Saturated Zone Analysis Model 
Report Integration (BSC 2004 [DIRS 171421]) this model report addresses the SZ FEPs 
pertaining to saturated groundwater flow in the geosphere and advection and dispersion in the SZ 
that are included for TSPA-LA (Table 6-1). Saturated Zone FEPs that were excluded for 
TSPA-LA are described in Features, Events, and Processes in SZ Flow and Transport 
(BSC 2004 [DIRS 170013]). Table 6-1 provides a list of FEPs that are relevant to this model 
analysis in accordance with their assignment in the LA FEP list (DTN: MO0407SEPFEPLA.000 
[DIRS 170760]). Specific reference to the various sections within this document where issues 
related to each FEP are addressed is provided in the table. The detailed discussions of these 
FEPs, and their implementation in TSPA-LA, are documented by BSC (2004 [DIRS 170013]). 
Table 6-1. Features, Events, and Processes Included in TSPA-LA and Relevant to this Model Report 
FEP No. FEP Name 
Sections Where 
Disposition is Described Discussed in Supporting AMRs 
2.2.07.1 
2.0A 
Saturated groundwater 
flow in the geosphere 
All of Section 6 Upstream Feeds - none 
Corroborating  BSC (2004 [DIRS 170037]) 
2.2.07.1 
5.0A 
Advection and 
dispersion in the SZ 
Section 6.7.3 Upstream Feeds - none 
Corroborating  BSC (2004 [DIRS 170010]) 
6.2 METHODS FOR CALCULATING DISTRIBUTED RECHARGE 
This analysis begins with the estimated distributed recharge used in the DVRFS models. Within 
the area of the UZ site-scale flow models, these estimates of distributed recharge are replaced by 
the simulated values of groundwater flow at the water table boundary of the UZ site-scale flow 
models. In the areas beneath the Fortymile Wash channel, the distributed recharge estimate is 
replaced by the estimates of recharge based on streamflow loss measurements. As will be 
demonstrated in the following analysis, within the SZ site-scale flow model boundaries, the bulk 
inflow and outflow occurs along the lateral boundaries of the model. Groundwater flows into 
and across the site model boundaries and ultimately discharges to the south of the site model. 
Inflow generally occurs along the northern and eastern boundaries and, to a lesser extent, the 
western boundary, and discharge is generally along the southern boundary. Inflow from the 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 6-2 October 2004 
north is generally the result of regional recharge at Timber Mountain, Pahute Mesa, and Rainer 
Mesa. Inflow from the east is generally the result of underflow in the regional Paleozoic 
carbonate aquifers that were recharged in the Specter Range. Outflow to the south is a result of 
carbonate underflow and flow in the alluvial aquifers that ultimately discharge at Ash Meadows 
or into wells in Amargosa Valley. 
6.2.1 Distributed Recharge from the DVRFS Models 
6.2.1.1 1997 DVRFS Model 
Distributed recharge from the 1997 DVRFS model is extracted from the model output using 
qualified codes and an Excel spreadsheet similar to the process described in the preceding 
revision of this analysis report (BSC 2001 [DIRS 164648]), although the results here reflect 
several corrections as discussed below. The pattern of distributed recharge is extracted from 
input files used for the 1997 DVRFS model (DTN: GS960808312144.003 [DIRS 105121]), 
which is constructed with a grid resolution of 1,500 m. It is assumed that this coarser grid 
resolution is adequate for use at the higher resolution of the base-case SZ site-scale flow model 
(500  500 m2) because increasing the resolution of the distributed recharge map without 
changing the total infiltration will not significantly change site-scale model results. All of the 
underlying assumptions embodied in the recharge model for the 1997 DVRFS model (DAgnese 
et al. 1997 [DIRS 100131]) apply to both the input and the results of that model used in this 
analysis. The basis of these assumptions is that the 1997 DVRFS model is predicated on 
measurements of groundwater discharge and is therefore constrained by the water balance for the 
entire system. Thus, the regional-scale flow model results provide the best available estimate of 
the volumetric groundwater flow rate at the scale of the base-caseSZ site-scale flow model (see 
the one-time use data qualification of DTN: GS960808312144.003 [DIRS 105121], in 
Appendix B). 
Values of distributed recharge are extracted from the 1997 DVRFS model input files for 
recharge, aap.fix2, dvparwel14, and rechs13fix3.asc, which were taken from the TDMS 
(DTN: GS960808312144.003 [DIRS 105121]). The Excel spreadsheet, read rchg from MFP.xls, 
is used to extract the values of recharge from the input files to calculate the output file 
rech_site_1997.dat, that contains the UTM coordinates on 1,500 m centers and the recharge in 
units of meters per year. The file, aap.fix2, contains recharge data for the 1997 DVRFS model 
on 1,500-m cells, rechs13fin3.asc gives the corresponding zonation (zone numbers 14) for each 
1997 DVRFS model cell, and dvparwel14 lists the calibrated multiplicative constants that 
correspond to each of the four different zones. Specifically, read rchg from MFP.xls takes the 
recharge values for a cell from aap.fix2, finds the corresponding zone number in rechs13fix3.asc, 
and multiplies the recharge value by the constant corresponding to the zone number found in 
dvparwel14. Zones are defined according to the fraction of rainwater that infiltrates through the 
vadose zone and enters the saturated zone and are discussed in Appendix B3.1.2. They range in 
magnitude from 0 to 0.227 and because they are simply multiplication factors, they are unitless. 
It must be made abundantly clear that the distributed recharge from the 1997 DVRFS model 
found in DTN: SN9908T0581999.001 has been used as input to the base-case SZ site-scale flow 
model. These results were derived solely from aap.fix2, which were taken directly from the 
TDMS (DTN: GS960808312144.003 [DIRS 105121]), without taking into account the zonation 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 6-3 October 2004 
values in rechs13fix3.asc or the multiplicative constants in dvparwel14. The interested reader is 
referred to the historical document for further details (BSC 2001 [DIRS 164648] Figure 6.1.1-1). 
An impact analysis of using distributed recharge values that have not been corrected for zonation 
is presented in Section 6.7 of this report. 
The routine, Xread_Distr_Rech_-UZ (V 1.0 STN: 10961-1.0-00 [DIRS 163075]), which is used 
for both the 1997 and 2003 UZ site-scale flow model extractions, is used to convert the values of 
distributed recharge contained in the file, rech_site_1997.dat, to a 500-m grid within the area of 
the base-case SZ site-scale model and writes the output to the file, rech_distr_1997.dat, in units 
of millimeters per year. The 500-m grid is used because it is the discretization used for the SZ 
site-scale flow models (previously, multiple discretizations were used because the size of the SZ 
site-scale flow models was yet to be determined). In addition, this routine excludes any grid 
locations within the footprints of the UZ site-scale flow models. A plot of the spatial distribution 
of recharge in file, rech_distr_1997.dat, from the 1997 DVRFS model is shown in Figure 6-1. 
Electronic copies of these files are included in the archive, DTN: SN0407T0504404.002, which 
is output from this report. The same technique was used to convert values of distributed 
recharge from file rech_site.dat to generate rech_distr.dat, which are both found in 
DTN: SN9908T0581999.001. With respect to DTN: SN9908T0581999.001, other than the 
difference in distributed recharge extracted from the 1997 DVRFS with zonation neglected, there 
are no changes in the methods, techniques, and results discussed below regarding distributed 
recharge from the UZ site-scale flow model. The methods and techniques for calculating 
distributed recharge through Fortymile Wash only differ in the grid resolution used  500 m in 
this revision of the analysis report and 125 m in the previous revision. 
6.2.1.2 2001 DVRFS Model 
Using the same assumptions described in the preceding section, the pattern of distributed 
recharge was extracted from the 2001 DVRFS model (note that there are 15 layers in the 2001 
model as opposed to three in the 1997 DVRFS model). Input and output model data were 
retrieved from DTN: GS040308312144.001 [DIRS 171472]. The FORTRAN routine, 
Xread_Distr_Rech_-UZ (STN: 10961-1.0-00 [DIRS 163075]), is again used to convert the 
values of distributed recharge contained in the file, rech_site_2001.dat, to a 500-m grid within 
the area of the alternate SZ site-scale model and writes the output to file, rech_distr_2001.dat, in 
units of millimeters per year. Because the 2001 DVRFS model was developed for 
MODFLOW-2000, which has different input and output files, the steps required to extract the 
pattern of distributed recharge are different. Figure 6-2 is a flowchart illustrating the use of the 
files listed in Table 6-2 with corresponding definitions. The flowchart in Figure 6-2 indicates 
that in addition to Xread_Distr_Rech_-UZ (STN: 10961-1.0-00 [DIRS 163075]), the codes Zone 
(STN: 10957-1.0-00 [DIRS 163078]), EXT_RECH (STN: 10958-1.0-00 [DIRS 163072]), and 
Mult_rech (STN: 10959-1.0-00 [DIRS 163073]) were used. 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 6-4 October 2004 
535000 540000 545000 550000 555000 560000 
UTM Easting (m) 
4050000 
4055000 
4060000 
4065000 
4070000 
4075000 
4080000 
4085000 
4090000 
UTM Northing (m) 
0.0 
1.0 
2.0 
3.0 
4.0 
5.0 
6.0 
7.0 
8.0 
9.0 
10.0 
Recharge 
(mm/yr) 
NOTE: Recharge map from the 1997 DVRFS model (DTN: GS960809312144.003 [DIRS 105121]) with values 
mapped onto the 500-m grid of the base-case SZ site-scale flow model domain. The area of the 1997 UZ 
site-scale flow model has been removed. Recharge data are taken from DTN: SN0407T0504404.002 in file, 
rech_distr_1997.dat. 
Figure 6-1. Map of Distributed Recharge from the 1997 DVRFS Model 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 6-5 October 2004 
The code, Zone (STN: 10957-1.0-00 [DIRS 163078]), is used to extract the zone arrays from the 
2001 DVRFS model over the site-scale domain. EXT_RECH (STN: 10958-1.0-00 
[DIRS 163072]) is used to extract the recharge values over the site-scale domain. Mult_rech 
(STN: 10959-1.0-00 [DIRS 163073]) uses zone data from Zone (STN: 10957-1.0-00 
[DIRS 163078]) to apply multiplication factors to the recharge data from EXT_RECH 
(STN: 10958-1.0-00 [DIRS 163072]). The multiplication factors are part of MODFLOW-2000 
input where, in general, a cell data value (recharge) is calculated from the product of a parameter 
value that applies to many cells and a cell multiplier (determined by zone number). This method 
facilitates parameter estimation because only the cell multipliers need to be estimated and not the 
recharge at every cell within the model. The multiplication factors and the zone name to zone 
number mapping are found in MODFLOW-2000 input files, SEN.txt and RCH.txt, respectively. 
The zone number in the input control file to Mult_rech specifies the multipliers. The output file 
from Mult_rech (STN 10959-1.0-00 [DIRS 163073]), rech_site_2001.dat, contains the 
distributed recharge over the entire site-scale domain on a 125-m grid instead of the 1,500-m grid 
used for the 1997 model. Output is stored electronically in the files, rech_site_2001.dat, and 
rech_distr_2001.dat, both of which are included in the output DTN: SN0407T0504404.002 from 
this report. Note the differences between Figures 6-1 and 6-3: there is significantly greater and 
more widespread infiltration within the SZ site-scale model domain from the 2001 DVRFS 
model than there is from the 1997 DVRFS model. Because the 1997 DVRFS recharge is applied 
to the base-case SZ site-scale flow model and the 2001 DVRFS recharge is applied to the 
alternate SZ site-scale flow model, a direct comparison of the impacts of the change in 
distributed recharge is impossible. 
6.2.1.3 Differences between Distributed Recharge from the 1997 and 2001 DVRFS 
Models 
Clearly, in comparing Figures 6-1 and 6-3, the net distributed recharge from the 2001 DVRFS 
model is significantly larger. Quantitatively, the 1997 DVRFS model yields 17.6 kg/s of 
recharge to the surface of the SZ site-scale flow model, while the 2001 DVRFS provides 
71.4 kg/s, an increase of over 400 percent. Both values have already had any fluxes removed 
that would otherwise have made it to the SZ through the UZ model domains. The difference in 
recharge between the 1997 and 2001 DVRFS models is due to different recharge applied to these 
models. The interested reader is referred to the model reports of DAgnese et al. (1997 
[DIRS 100131] and 2002 [DIRS 158876]). 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 6-6 October 2004 
Figure 6-2. Flowchart of Utility Codes that Extract Distributed Recharges and Lateral Boundary Fluxes 
from the 2001 DVRFS Model Used as Boundary Conditions for the SZ Site-Scale Model 
2001 USGS DVRFS 
(MODFLOW-2000) 
CBCF.asc rch_zone6.asc rechg.asc 
east_bdy2001 
west_bdy2001 
north_bdy2001 
south_bdy2001 
rch_zone6.out ext_rech.out 
rech_site_xxxx.dat 
EXTRACT 
1.1 ZONES EXT_RECH 
MULT_RECH 
1997 USGS DVRFS 
(Modflowp) 
east_bdy1997 
west_bdy1997 
north_bdy1997 
south_bdy1997 
xread_distr_rech_-uz 
rech_distr_xxxx.dat 
xread_reaches 
rech_distr_stream 
_xxxx.dat 
xwrite_flow_new 
MS EXCEL 
rech_all_new.xls 
1997 or 2003 
UZ Site-Scale 
Flow Model 
rech_all_new_xxxx.prn 
wt_flow_500 
_xxxx.dat 
digit.dat EXTRACT 
1.0 
cbcf.new 
MS EXCEL 
wt_flux_uz.xls 
1997 Process 
Savard 
1998 
MS EXCEL 
rchg_from_MFP.xls 
aap.fix2 
dvparwel14 
rechsl3fix3.asc

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 6-7 October 2004 
Table 6-2. Definition of Files for the Flowchart in Figure 6-2 
File Name Description 
aap.fix2 preliminary distributed recharge for MODFLOWP 
CBCF.asc MODFLOW-2000 cell-by-cell flux file (ASCII) 
cbcf.new MODFLOWP cell-by-cell flux file (ASCII) 
digit.dat 1997 or 2001 DVRFS model with Fortymile Wash recharge included 
dvparwel14 file listing calibration constants to apply to aap.fix2 according to the zonation 
in rechs13fix3.asc for MODFLOWP 
east_bdy1997 lateral fluxes through the east boundary of the SZ flow model (1997 DVRFS) 
east_bdy2001 lateral fluxes through the east boundary of the SZ flow model (2001 DVRFS) 
EXT_RECH.out intermediate MODLFOW-2000 recharge output files 
north_bdy1997 lateral fluxes through the north boundary of the SZ flow model (1997 
DVRFS) 
north_bdy2001 lateral fluxes through the north boundary of the SZ flow model (2001 
DVRFS) 
rchp input file for recharge to MODFLOWP 
read rchg from MFP.xls Excel file that calculated distributed recharge applied to the 1997 DVRFS 
rch_zone6.out intermediate MODLFOW-2000 recharge output files 
rechg.asc MODFLOW-2000 input file defining recharge values (ASCII) 
rech_all_new.xls Excel file with all three recharge sources (two worksheets, one for the 1997 
models and one for the 2001 and 2003 models) 
rech_all_new_xxxx.prn text output from rech_all_new.xls for each year (1997 or 2003) 
rechs13fix3.asc Zone file for MODFLOWP (ASCII) 
rech_distr_stream_xxxx.dat combined estimates of the distributed recharge from the 1997 or 2001 
DVRFS model with Fortymile Wash recharge included 
rech_distr_xxxx.dat 1997 or 2001 DVRFS distributed recharge on a 125-m grid 
rech_site_xxxx.dat 1997 or 2001 DVRFS distributed recharge on a 1,500-m grid 
south_bdy1997 lateral fluxes through the south boundary of the SZ flow model (1997 
DVRFS) 
south_bdy2001 lateral fluxes through the south boundary of the SZ flow model (2001 
DVRFS) 
west_bdy1997 lateral fluxes through the west boundary of the SZ flow model (1997 DVRFS) 
west_bdy2001 lateral fluxes through the west boundary of the SZ flow model (2001 DVRFS) 
wt_flow_500_xxxx.dat final recharge data for use in the SZ site-scale flow model using either the 
1997 models (1997) or the 2001 and 2003 models (2003) 
wt_flux_uz.xls Excel file with 1997 and 2003 UZ fluxes to the SZ model (two worksheets, 
one for each model year) 
_zones#.asc MODFLOW-2000 input file defining recharge zones (ASCII) 
(6)_zones#.out intermediate MODLFOW-2000 recharge output files 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 6-8 October 2004 
535000 540000 545000 550000 555000 560000 
UTM Easting (m) 
4050000 
4055000 
4060000 
4065000 
4070000 
4075000 
4080000 
4085000 
4090000 
UTM Northing (m) 
0.0 
1.0 
2.0 
3.0 
4.0 
5.0 
6.0 
7.0 
8.0 
9.0 
10.0 
Recharge 
(mm/yr) 
NOTE: Recharge map from the 2001 DVRFS model (DTN: GS040308312144.001 [DIRS 171472]) with values 
mapped onto the 500-m grid of alternative conceptual SZ site-scale model domain. The area of 2003 UZ 
site-scale flow model has been removed. Recharge data are taken from files listed in Table 4-2. 
Figure 6-3. Map of Distributed Recharge from the 2001 DVRFS Model 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 6-9 October 2004 
6.2.2 Recharge from UZ Site-Scale Flow Model Area 
To combine the output from the UZ site-scale flow model with the other components of the 
recharge model, the geographical coordinates from the UZ site-scale flow model are converted 
from the Nevada State Plane coordinate system to the UTM coordinate system. The results of 
these coordinate conversions are given in the spreadsheets in the file, wt_flux_uz.xls. 
CORPSCON (V 5.11 STN: 10547-5.11.08-00 [DIRS 155082]) was used to perform the 
coordinate conversion. 
6.2.2.1 1997 UZ Site-Scale Flow Model 
The recharge in the area of the 1997 UZ site-scale flow model is taken from the output file for 
the UZ flow simulations, mnaqb_p.out, which is taken from the TDMS 
(DTN: LB971212001254.001 [DIRS 104749]). This TOUGH2 (V 1.4 STN: 10007-1.4-01) 
output file corresponds to the base-case, mean alpha (van Genuchten unsaturated flow 
parameter), present day infiltration scenario (Wu et al. 1997 [DIRS 156453]). 
Elements in the 1997 UZ site-scale flow model at the bottom boundary of the model (i.e., the 
water table) are identified by the prefix BT in the input and output files. Elements that are 
associated with fracture flow use the prefix F and elements for matrix flow use the prefix M 
in this dual-permeability model. These prefixes are used to extract the 1,470 elements at the 
water table in the UZ site-scale flow model using the UNIX grep command. The following 
two commands are used to perform the extraction: 
grep BT..F mnaqb_p.out>extract_F_1997.out 
grep BT..M mnaqb_p.out>extract_M_1997.out 
The two output files, extract_F_1997.out and extract_M_1997.out, contain the groundwater flux 
(kg/s) at the water table boundary in the fourth column of the files for the fracture and matrix 
components of flow, respectively. The first three columns contain element identifier and 
location information. 
The numerical grid file for the 1997 UZ site-scale flow model mesh_bas.2k is taken from the 
TDMS (DTN: LB971212001254.001 [DIRS 104749]) to obtain information on the x and y 
coordinates of each element and information on the connection area for each element (area 
connecting adjacent elements). The following UNIX command is used to perform the extraction: 
grep botbd mesh_bas.2k>meshgrep2_1997.out 
The output file, meshgrep2_1997.out, contains the x coordinate (Nevada State Plane in meters) in 
column numbers 51 to 60, and the y coordinate in column numbers 61 to 70. 
The following UNIX command is used to extract the connection areas: 
grep BTM mesh_bas.2k>conn_M_1997.out 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 6-10 October 2004 
The output file, conn_M_1997.out, contains the connection area of each element in columns 51 
to 60. 
These data are combined in an Excel spreadsheet in the file, wt_flux_uz.xls, under worksheet, 
1997. This spreadsheet is constructed by taking columns from the extract_F_1997.out, 
extract_M_1997.out, meshgrep2_1997.out and conn_M_1997.out files and performing additional 
operations to calculate total volumetric flow rate and average percolation flux. The first 
additional operation is to add column G of the spreadsheet (fracture flux in kg/s) to column H 
(matrix flux in kg/s) to get column I (total flux in kg/s). The second operation is to divide the 
resulting column I by column J (cell connect area in m2) to get column K (flux per area in 
kg/m2s). The final operation is to multiply the resulting column K by the constant 31,557,600 to 
convert the units of flux per area to millimeters per year. This result is stored in column L. The 
results plotted in Figure 6-4 are overlaid by the 1997 UZ site-scale flow model grid. 
169000 170000 171000 172000 173000 
NSP Easting (m) 
230000 
231000 
232000 
233000 
234000 
235000 
236000 
237000 
238000 
239000 
NSP Northing (m) 
0.0 
2.0 
4.0 
6.0 
8.0 
10.0 
12.0 
14.0 
16.0 
18.0 
20.0 
Groundwater 
Flux (mm/yr) 
NOTE: The 1997 UZ site-scale flow model grid is shown overlaid on the map of simulated recharge to the SZ for the 
base case with the present climate from file, mnaqb_p.out (DTN: LB971212001254.001 [DIRS 104749]). 
Figure 6-4. Map of Groundwater Flux Simulated at the Bottom Boundary of the 1997 UZ Site-Scale 
Flow Model 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 6-11 October 2004 
6.2.2.2 2003 UZ Site-Scale Flow Model 
Using the same assumptions, techniques, and procedures described in the preceding section, 
patterns of distributed recharge were extracted from the 2003 UZ site-scale flow model 
(TOUGH2, V 1.4, STN: 10007-1.4-01). Model data were retrieved from 
DTN: LB03023DSSCP9I.001 [DIRS: 163044]. The mesh file is mesh_2kn.v1, and the flux data 
file is flow9.dat_preq_mA.dat. It should be noted that the numerical grid has been updated in the 
2003 version of the UZ site-scale flow model. Because of the difference in grids between the 
1997 and 2003 versions of the UZ site-scale flow model, there are 2,042 elements at the water 
table (1,470 in the 1997 model). Note the different infiltration distributions between Figures 6-4 
and 6-5. The areas of the 1997 and 2003 UZ site-scale flow models are also slightly different: 
i.e., the 2003 model area is approximately 17 percent smaller. Results may be found in 
meshgrep2_2003.out, extract_F_2003.out, extract_M_2003.out, and conn_M_2003.out, as well 
as in the 2003 worksheets in wt_flux_uz.xls. 
NOTE: The 2003 UZ site-scale flow model grid is shown overlaid on the map of simulated recharge to the SZ for the 
base case with the present climate from file, flow9.dat_preq_mA.dat (DTN: LB03023DSSCP9I.001 
[DIRS 163044]). 
Figure 6-5. Map of Groundwater Flux Simulated at the Bottom Boundary of the 2003 UZ Site-Scale 
Flow Model 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 6-12 October 2004 
6.2.2.3 Differences between Distributed Recharge from the 1997 and 2003 UZ Site-Scale 
Flow Models 
Clearly, there are differences in SZ site-scale model infiltration between the 1997 and 2003 UZ 
site-scale flow models. In particular, the faults in the 2003 UZ site-scale flow model apparently 
focus much of the recharge. Note that the infiltration parameters used in both the 1997 and 2003 
UZ site-scale flow models are identical (i.e., the same infiltration rate is used at the top of each 
model). The only thing that changes is how the UZ redistributes that water within the model 
domain. Also, because the UZ model boundaries are different (the 2003 UZ site-scale flow 
model boundary is 17 percent smaller than the 1997 UZ site-scale flow model boundary), there is 
a corresponding 17 percent decrease in water exiting the 2003 UZ site-scale flow model. 
6.2.3 Focused Recharge from Fortymile Wash 
Recharge data from infiltration along Fortymile Wash were taken from 
DTN: MO0102DQRGWREC.001 [DIRS 155523]. These data are based on estimates of 
streamflow loss along four reaches of Fortymile Wash as described by Savard (1998 
[DIRS 102213]). These reaches are the Fortymile Canyon reach, Upper Jackass Flats reach, 
Lower Jackass Flats reach, and Amargosa Desert reach, listed from north to south and shown in 
Figure 6-6. The estimate of recharge along the northernmost reach of Fortymile Wash 
(Fortymile Canyon reach) has been extrapolated to the north boundary of the SZ site-scale model 
domain. The length and width of the Fortymile Canyon reach within the Savard study and 
within the SZ site-scale model domains were estimated graphically from Figure 6-6. The 
estimate of recharge along the Upper Jackass Flats reach presented by Savard is anomalously 
low relative to the other reaches as estimated in the same report (see Savard (1998 
[DIRS 102213]) for a full explanation and discussion of this discrepancy). Consequently, an 
interpolated value of recharge for the Upper Jackass Flats reach is applied. The volumetric 
groundwater recharge rates per kilometer of reach are weighted and averaged for both the 
Fortymile Canyon reach and the Lower Jackass Flats reach, and this value is applied to the 
Upper Jackass Flats reach. Specifically, the upper 1.62 km of Upper Jackass Flats was assigned 
recharge equal to that in Fortymile Canyon, and the lower 8.48 km was assigned recharge equal 
to that in Lower Jackass Flats. These two numbers were weighted by the entire length of Upper 
Jackass Flats as follows: 
mm/yr. 2.21 mm/yr 53 . 1 
km 10.1 
km 48 . 8 mm/yr 77 . 5 
km 10.1 
km 62 . 1 
Flats Jackass Lower 
Flats Jackass Upper 
Flats Jackass Lower recharge w/ Flats Jackass Upper 
Canyon Fortymile 
Flats Jackass Upper 
Canyon Fortymile recharge w/ Flats Jackass Upper 
= + 
=  
+  
=
= 
R 
L 
L 
R 
L 
L 
The value of 1.62 km is derived from a graphical and geographic interpretation of the portion of 
Upper Jackass Flats likely to have recharge equal to Fortymile Canyon. The recharge rate along 
the Amargosa Desert reach is scaled in proportion to the length of this reach within the SZ 
site-scale model areas. The resulting estimates of the recharge rates are summarized in 
Table 6-3. 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 6-13 October 2004 
535000 540000 545000 550000 555000 560000 
4050000 
4055000 
4060000 
4065000 
4070000 
4075000 
4080000 
4085000 
4090000 
NOTE: The base image of the figure is a false-color satellite photo of the Yucca Mountain area. The four reaches of 
Fortymile Wash are shown by the different colors overlying the wash: green  Fortymile Canyon, red  Upper 
Jackass Flats, blue  Lower Jackass Flats, pink  Amargosa Desert (DTN: MO0102DQRGWREC.001 
[DIRS 155523]). The blue line delineates boundaries of the SZ site-scale model with UTM coordinates (m) 
listed. The approximate outline of the repository is shown with the red line and the outline of the UZ 
site-scale flow model is shown with the yellow line. Black symbols indicate borehole locations. 
Figure 6-6. Map of Recharge along the Fortymile Wash Stream Channel 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 6-14 October 2004 
Table 6-3. Fortymile Wash Recharge Estimates 
Fortymile 
Wash Reach 
Reach Lengtha 
(km) 
Estimated 
Rechargeb 
(m3/year) 
Reach Length 
in SZ 
Site-Scale 
Model (km) 
Estimated 
Recharge in SZ 
Site-Scale 
Model Area 
(m3/year) 
Estimated 
Recharge 
Flux 
(mm/year) 
Fortymile 
Canyon 
6.50 27,000 9.50 39,500c 5.77 
Upper Jackass 
Flats 
10.1 13,600d 10.1 13,600 2.21 
Lower Jackass 
Flats 
16.8 16,400 16.8 16,400 1.53 
Amargosa 
Desert 
25.0 64,300 10.0 25,700c 0.22 
aSource: Savard 1998 [DIRS 102213]. 
bSource: DTN: MO0102DQRGWREC.001 [DIRS 155523]. 
cScaled in proportion to length within the SZ site-scale model area. 
dInterpolated value. 
The first step of the analysis is to identify those nodes that correspond to the Fortymile Wash 
channel for each of the reaches on a 500-m grid, as shown in Figure 6-6. Along most of the 
length of the Fortymile Wash channel, nodes within an approximately 500-m wide zone are 
designated to receive recharge from the wash. The nodes corresponding to a broad area of 
distributary channels in the Amargosa Desert are identified for the southernmost reach within the 
area of the SZ site-scale model domain. For the base-case SZ site-scale model domain 
(southwest corner at X, Y = 533,340, 4,046,780), there are 317 nodes in the Fortymile Canyon 
reach, 304 nodes in the Upper Jackass Flats reach, 499 nodes in the Lower Jackass Flats reach, 
and 2,880 nodes in the Amargosa Desert reach (from file rech_distr_stream_1997.dat in 
DTN: SN0407T0504404.002). This yields a net flux of 1.93 kg/s through Fortymile Wash. 
In the previous version of this analysis report, the first step was to identify nodes that correspond 
to the Fortymile Wash channel for each of the reaches on a 125-m resolution grid. This is 
different from the 500-m resolution grid used in the preceding analysis. The 125-m grid 
resolution was not used in this analysis because the base-case SZ site-scale flow model uses a 
500-m grid resolution and at the time the 125-m grid was originally used, the cell dimensions of 
the base-case SZ site-scale flow model were undetermined. The same base-case SZ site-scale 
flow model is used with southwest corner at X, Y = 533,340, 4,046,780. The results are 
438 nodes in the Fortymile Canyon reach, 394 nodes in the Upper Jackass Flats reach, 
687 nodes in the Lower Jackass Flats reach, and 7,544 nodes in the Amargosa Desert reach. This 
yielded a net flux of 3.00 kg/s through Fortymile Wash. These data are contained in file 
rech_distr_stream.dat in DTN: SN9908T0581999.001. 
Because of the translation of the alternate SZ site-scale flow model domain (southwest corner at 
X, Y = 533,000, 4,046,500), there are 327 nodes in the Fortymile Canyon reach, 315 nodes in the 
Upper Jackass Flats reach, 485 nodes in the Lower Jackass Flats reach, and 2,952 nodes in the 
Amargosa Desert reach (from file rech_distr_stream_2001.dat in DTN: SN0407T0504404.002). 
A grid spacing of 500 m was used for this analysis. This yields a net recharge of 1.97 kg/s 
through Fortymile Wash. 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 6-15 October 2004 
Data processing is performed with the routine, Xread_Reaches (STN: 10962-1.0-00 
[DIRS 163076]). This routine reads in the file, digit.dat, which contains a set of digitized points 
defining the stream channel location for the four reaches of Fortymile Wash within the SZ 
site-scale model domains and the recharge rates for those reaches as tabulated in Table 6-2. The 
file, digit.dat, was generated using the digitize function in Surfer from Figure 6-6. The routine 
also reads in files rech_distr_xxxx.dat (where xxxx is a place holder for the years 1997 or 2001), 
which contain the values of distributed recharge within the SZ site-scale model domain, as 
described in Sections 6.2.1.1 and 6.2.1.2. The routine, Xread_Reaches (STN: 10962-1.0-00 
[DIRS 163076]), combines the estimates of distributed recharge from the 1997 or 2001 DVRFS 
model and the estimates of focused recharge, and outputs the file, rech_distr_stream_xxxx.dat. 
This file contains location coordinates (UTM m) and recharge (millimeters per year) on a 125-m 
grid for all locations with nonzero values of recharge. Note that the 125-m grid was generated 
anticipating that the SZ site-scale flow model might be refined to this level. Such discretization 
has little impact on this analysis report, which has results upscaled to a 500-m grid. Where 1997 
or 2001 DVRFS model recharge overlaps with focused recharge from Fortymile Wash, only the 
recharge from Fortymile Wash is used. The file, rech_distr_stream_xxxx.dat, also excludes grid 
locations within the areas of the UZ site-scale flow models. 
6.2.4 Combined Recharge Model 
6.2.4.1 1997 DVRFS Model, 1997 UZ Site-Scale Flow Model, and Fortymile Wash 
The estimates of distributed recharge and focused recharge that are contained in the file, 
rech_distr_stream_1997.dat, are combined with the simulated recharge at the water table 
boundary of the 1997 UZ site-scale flow model contained in file, wt_flux_uz.xls, in an Excel 
spreadsheet. The combined recharge is in the file, rech_all_new.xls, under worksheet 1997. In 
the rech_all_new.xls spreadsheet (worksheet 1997), the groundwater mass flux (kilograms per 
second) into each grid node is calculated (units of mass flux are required by finite element heat 
and mass transfer code [FEHM]). The first 1,470 entries in the spreadsheet are for the output of 
the 1997 UZ site-scale flow model and the remaining entries are for the distributed recharge and 
focused recharge components of the analysis. The result of the combined estimates is mapped in 
Figure 6-7. 
These results are reformatted for input to the FEHM code (V2.21, STN: 10086-2.21-00) using 
the routine, Xwrite_Flow_New (STN: 10963-1.0-125-00 [DIRS 163077]). The 
Xwrite_Flow_New routine reads in the data in the rech_all_new.xls spreadsheet (saved in the text 
file rech_all_new_1997.prn, which has the header lines removed). The Xwrite_Flow_New 
(STN: 10963-1.0-125-00 [DIRS 163077]) routine writes output in a format suitable for input to 
the flow macro of FEHM for specified groundwater mass flux (kg/s). The 500-m resolution of 
the grid nodes in the output from the Xwrite_Flow_New (STN: 10963-1.0-125-00 
[DIRS 163077]) routine is specified as input to the routine. The output is formatted so that grid 
nodes are numbered sequentially from the southwest corner of the SZ site-scale model domain, 
moving from west to east and south to north. An output file is generated for 500-m nodal 
resolutions in the file, wt_flow_500_1997.dat in DTN: SN0407T0504404.002. 
For completeness, the recharge extracted from the 1997 DVRFS with zonation neglected and the 
125-m grid resolution used to calculate the recharge through Fortymile Wash, which was used to 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 6-16 October 2004 
calibrate the base-case SZ site-scale flow model, is presented in Figure 6-8. The output file 
generated for 500-m nodal resolutions is in the file, wt_flow_500.dat in 
DTN: SN9908T0581999.001. 
535000 540000 545000 550000 555000 560000 
UTM Easting (m) 
4050000 
4055000 
4060000 
4065000 
4070000 
4075000 
4080000 
4085000 
4090000 
UTM Northing (m) 
0.0 
0.0 
0.5 
1.0 
1.5 
2.0 
2.5 
3.0 
3.5 
4.0 
4.5 
5.0 
5.5 
6.0 
6.5 
7.0 
7.5 
8.0 
8.5 
9.0 
9.5 
10.0 
Recharge 
(mm/yr) 
NOTES: Recharge map from the 1997 DVRFS model from output files: aap.fix2, dvparwel14, and rech13fix3.asc 
(DTN: GS960809312144.003 [DIRS 105121]). Recharge along Fortymile Wash is taken from 
DTN: MO0102DQRGWREC.001 [DIRS 155523]. Groundwater flux at the water table is from the 1997 UZ 
site-scale flow model, base case, present climate from output file: mnaqb_p.out 
(DTN: LB971212001254.001 [DIRS 104749]). This figure shows the correct distributed recharge. 
This map combines the components of distributed recharge from the 1997 DVRFS model, recharge below 
the 1997 UZ site-scale flow model domain, and focused recharge along Fortymile Wash.) Because this 
map is not distributed on a 500-m grid, it is not direct input to the model. 
Figure 6-7. Corrected Detailed Recharge Map to the Base-Case SZ Site-Scale Flow Model 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 6-17 October 2004 
535000 540000 545000 550000 555000 560000 
UTM Easting 
4050000 
4055000 
4060000 
4065000 
4070000 
4075000 
4080000 
4085000 
4090000 
U T M N o r t h i n g ( m ) 
0.0 
0.5 
1.0 
1.5 
2.0 
2.5 
3.0 
3.5 
4.0 
4.5 
5.0 
5.5 
6.0 
6.5 
7.0 
7.5 
8.0 
8.5 
9.0 
9.5 
Recharge 
(mm/yr) 
NOTES: Recharge map from the 1997 DVRFS model from output file: aap.fix2 (DTN: GS960809312144.003 
[DIRS 105121]). Recharge along Fortymile Wash is taken from DTN: MO0102DQRGWREC.001 
[DIRS 155523] with a 125-m grid resolution. Groundwater flux at the water table is from the 1997 UZ 
site-scale flow model, base case, present climate from output file: mnaqb_p.out 
(DTN: LB971212001254.001 [DIRS 104749]). This figure shows the incorrect distributed recharge. See 
Figure 6-10 for the 500-m resolution grid supplied to the base-case SZ site-scale flow model. 
This map combines the components of distributed recharge from the 1997 DVRFS model without 
correcting for zonation, recharge below the 1997 UZ site-scale flow model domain, and focused recharge 
along Fortymile Wash using 125-m grid resolution.) Because this map is not distributed on a 500-m grid, it 
is not direct input to the model. 
Figure 6-8. Detailed Recharge Map to the Base-Case SZ Site-Scale Flow Model 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 6-18 October 2004 
6.2.4.2 2001 DVRFS Model, 2003 UZ Site-Scale Flow Model, and Fortymile Wash 
Using the same assumptions, techniques, and procedures described in the preceding section, 
patterns of distributed recharge were extracted from the 2003 UZ site-scale flow model (data 
were retrieved from DTN: LB03023DSSCP9I.001 [DIRS: 163044]). It should be noted that the 
numerical grid has been updated in the 2003 UZ site-scale flow model, thus the first 2,042 
entries in the spreadsheet are output from this model. In addition, the 2001 DVRFS model was 
developed using MODFLOW-2000, while the 1997 model used MODFLOWP (V 2.3 
STN: 10144-2.3-00 [DIRS 150454]). Output is stored in the 2003 worksheets of the 
wt_flux_uz.xls and rech_all_new.xls spreadsheets and rech_all_new_2003.prn. Figure 6-9 shows 
the distributed recharge from the three different sources on a 125-m grid, which should be 
compared to Figure 6-7. Output for 500-m nodal resolution is in the file, wt_flow_500_2003.dat 
in DTN: SN0407T0504404.002. 
6.3 METHODS FOR EXTRACTING LATERAL BOUNDARY FLUXES FROM DVRFS 
MODELS 
6.3.1 1997 DVRFS Model 
The TDMS contains input files in DTN: GS960808312144.003 [DIRS 105121]. MODFLOWP 
is maintained in Software Configuration Management (SCM) (STN: 10144-2.3-00 
[DIRS 150454]). It is assumed that minor modification of the input files as discussed below 
(e.g., changing file reference names), does not alter the calculated flow terms. The basis of this 
assumption is that the authors of the 1997 DVRFS model provided the executable file for 
MODFLOWP (V 2.3 STN: 10144-2.3-00 [DIRS 150454]) to allow generation of the output files 
from the input files contained therein. 
The 1997 DVRFS states that the density of water is constant, but does not specify a specific 
value. A value of 1,000 kg/m3 is used for fluid density in this analysis to convert from 
volumetric flows (cubic meters per day) to mass flows (kilograms per second) by dividing 
by 86.4. The mass flow rates presented by this analysis could be easily modified to represent an 
alternative value for fluid density; however, density changes due to salinity or temperature 
variation would only be on the order of a few percent at most. This is well within the uncertainty 
of the distributed recharge and lateral fluxes that were determined in this analysis, as modeled by 
the DVRFS and UZ site-scale flow models. 
Flux extraction from the 1997 DVRFS model is performed in three steps. Because the TDMS 
does not include output files from the 1997 DVRFS model, the first step is to re-run the model to 
generate an unformatted output file containing cell-by-cell flow values. Secondly, a FORTRAN 
routine is used to read the unformatted file and write selected values to formatted files. Finally, 
an Excel spreadsheet is used to sum the flow terms for selected segments along the site-scale 
boundaries and to convert from volumetric to mass flow rates. 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 6-19 October 2004 
535000 540000 545000 550000 555000 560000 
UTM Easting (m) 
4050000 
4055000 
4060000 
4065000 
4070000 
4075000 
4080000 
4085000 
4090000 
UTM Northing (m) 
0
0.001 
0.5 
1
1.5 
2
2.5 
3
3.5 
4
4.5 
5
5.5 
6
6.5 
7
7.5 
8
8.5 
9
9.5 
10 
Recharge 
(mm/yr) 
NOTES: Recharge map from the 2001 DVRFS model from output files listed in Table 4-2 
(DTN: GS040308312144.001 [DIRS 171472]). Recharge along Fortymile Wash is taken from 
DTN: MO0102DQRGWREC.001 [DIRS 155523]. Groundwater flux at the water table is from the 2003 UZ 
site-scale flow model with base case, present climate from output file: flow9.dat_preq_mA.dat 
(DTN: LB03023DSSCP9I.001 [DIRS 163044]). (Because this map is not distributed on a 500-m grid, it is 
not direct input to the model.) See Figure 6-12 for the 500-m resolution grid supplied to the alternate SZ 
site-scale flow model. 
This map combines the components of distributed recharge from the 2001 DVRFS model, recharge below 
the 2003 UZ site-scale flow model domain, and focused recharge along Fortymile Wash). 
Figure 6-9. Detailed Recharge Map to the Alternate SZ Site-Scale Flow Model 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 6-20 October 2004 
Running the regional model requires three steps: 
1. The 1997 DVRFS model results are calculated using the MODFLOWP (V 2.3, 
STN: 10144-2.3-00 [DIRS 150454]) computer code. An executable file, 
MODFLOWP, was obtained from the Software Configuration Management System 
and a set of input files are obtained from the TDMS (DTN: GS960808312144.003 
[DIRS 105121]) and copied to a Sun workstation (Solaris 7). 
2. The input files for the 1997 DVRFS model in the TDMS are set up to calculate 
certain statistics, but the input files required for these statistics (BEALE.DAT and 
BEALE2.DAT) are not present. Because these statistics are not required for this 
analysis, two changes are made to the input files to allow MODFLOWP (V 2.3 
STN: 10144-2.3-00 [DIRS 150454]) to run without these files. First, in the input 
file, dvparwel14, the fifth entry of line 7 (in columns 24 and 25) is changed 
from 72 to 0. This is a flag that tells MODFLOWP (V 2.3 STN: 10144-2.3-00 
[DIRS 150454]) not to calculate the statistics that require BEALE.DAT and 
BEALE2.DAT. Second, the lines containing the file names, BEALE.DAT and 
BEALE2.DAT, are deleted from the input file, Files. This file contains file names and 
their corresponding logical unit numbers. Deleting these file names from Files 
prevents MODFLOWP (V 2.3 STN: 10144-2.3-00 [DIRS 150454]) from trying to 
open files that are not present. 
3. The executable (MODFLOWP) is then run. The output file which is used in this 
analysis is the cbcf.new file, which contains cell-by-cell flow terms, which are 
extracted along the boundaries of the base-case SZ site-scale model domain, the 
coordinates of which are: 
xmin = 533,340 m E 
xmax = 563,340 m E 
ymin = 4,046,780 m N 
ymax = 4,091,780 m N 
The regional model is 163 rows by 153 columns by 3 layers (74,817 cells) with the southwest 
corner at X, Y = (440,340, 3,944,782) (DAgnese et al. 1997 [DIRS 100131], p. 75). Row 1 is to 
the north. Column 1 is to the west. Each model cell is 1,500  1,500 m2 in the longitudinal 
directions. Then, 
the x coordinates at the east face of column 62 = 440,340 + (62)(1,500) = 533,340 
the x coordinates at the east face of column 82 = 440,340 + (82)(1,500) = 563,340 
the y coordinates at the south face of row 95 = 3,944,782 + (16395)(1,500) = 4,046,782 
the y coordinates at the south face of row 65 = 3,944,782 + (16365)(1,500) = 4,091,782 
Thus, the domain outlined by the east faces of columns 62 and 82, and the south faces of rows 65 
and 95 of the regional model form a domain that is shifted 2 m north of the base-case SZ 
site-scale model domain. The west boundary of the base-case SZ site-scale model consists of the 
east face of column 62 for rows 6695. The east boundary consists of the east face of column 82 
for rows 6695. The north boundary consists of the south face of row 65 for columns 6382. 
The south boundary consists of the south face of row 95 for columns 6382. 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 6-21 October 2004 
The routine, Extract (V 1.0 STN: 10955-1.0-00 [DIRS 163070]), was used to extract and write 
the cell-by-cell flow terms along the boundaries. This routine writes the flow terms along each 
boundary to a separate file. The files are named west_bdy1997, east_bdy1997, north_bdy1997, 
and south_bdy1997. Details of the routine are given in comment statements in the source code 
of the routine. 
These files were entered into an Excel workbook (boundaries.xls). Excel is used for two 
calculations: to sum flow terms for segments along the site model boundaries, and to convert the 
volumetric flows (m3/day) to mass flows (kg/s). The segments are selected to group fluxes of 
similar direction and magnitude. 
6.3.2 2001 DVRFS Model 
Using the same assumptions, techniques, and procedures described in the preceding section, 
patterns of distributed recharge were extracted from the 2001 DVRFS model. Input and output 
model data were retrieved from DTN: GS040308312144.001 [DIRS 171472]). It should be 
noted that the 2001 DVRFS model was developed for MODFLOW-2000 and therefore has 
different input and output files. Recall that the 1997 DVRFS model was constructed for 
MODFLOWP (V 2.3 STN: 10144-2.3-00 [DIRS 150454]). The cell-to-cell flux file, CBCF.asc, 
was retrieved from DTN: GS040308312144.001 [DIRS 171472]). It is a text rather than binary 
file, thus Extract (V 1.1 STN: 10955-1.1-00 [DIRS 163071]) was used. Outputs are written to 
the files, west_bdy2001, east_bdy2001, north_bdy2001, and south_bdy2001, and then copied to 
the spreadsheet that contains the 2001 DVRFS lateral boundary data onto the corresponding 
worksheets. In this spreadsheet, flow terms are summed for segments with similar properties 
along the site model boundaries and units are converted from volumetric flows (m3/day) to mass 
flows (kg/s). The segments (different from the 1997 DVRFS segments) are selected to group 
fluxes of similar direction and magnitude. These segments are explicitly defined in 
Sections 6.5.1 and 6.5.2. 
The coordinates of an alternate conceptual SZ site-scale model domain are: 
xmin = 533,000 m E 
xmax = 563,000 m E 
ymin = 4,046,500 m N 
ymax = 4,091,500 m N 
The 2001 DVRFS model consists of 194 rows by 160 columns by 15 layers. The 465,600-cell 
model is oriented exactly northsouth. The lower left-corner origin of the grid is located at UTM 
coordinates (X, Y = 437,000, 3,928,000). Grid discretization along both rows and columns was 
set to 1,500 m (DAgnese et al. 2002 [DIRS 158876], p. 47). Row 1 is to the north. Column 1 is 
to the west. Then, 
the x coordinates at the east face of column 64 = 437,000 + (64)(1,500) = 533,000 
the x coordinates at the east face of column 84 = 437,000 + (84)(1,500) = 563,000 
the y coordinates at the south face of row 115 = 3,928,000 + (194115)(1,500) = 4,046,500 
the y coordinates at the south face of row 85 = 3,928,000 + (19485)(1,500) = 4,091,500 
Thus, the domain outlined by the east faces of columns 64 and 84, and the south faces of rows 85 
and 115 of the regional model form the alternate SZ site-scale model domain. The west 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 6-22 October 2004 
boundary of this site-scale model consists of the east face of column 64 for rows 86115. The 
east boundary consists of the east face of column 84 for rows 86115. The north boundary 
consists of the south face of row 85 for columns 6584. The south boundary consists of the 
south face of row 115 for columns 6584. The flowchart in Figure 6-2 describes the steps 
necessary to extract distributed recharge and lateral boundary fluxes. It should be noted that the 
alternate SZ site-scale flow model domain is translated 340 m west and 280 m south in 
comparison to the base-case version of this model. Because this translation is less than one grid 
cell in either direction, it has no impact on the boundary conditions derived in this report or in 
interpretation of model results. 
6.4 DISTRIBUTED RECHARGE 
6.4.1 1997 DVRFS Model and 1997 UZ Site-Scale Flow Model 
The results of the combined estimates of recharge rate from distributed recharge on a 
500  500 m2 grid from the 1997 DVRFS model (DAgnese et al. (1997 [DIRS 100131]), 
recharge in the area of the 1997 UZ site-scale flow model (DTN: LB971212001254.001 
[DIRS 104749]), and focused recharge along Fortymile Wash (DTN: MO0102DQRGWREC.001 
[DIRS 155523]) are shown graphically in Figure 6-10 and presented in output 
DTN: SN0407T0504404.002. Because the zones in the 1997 DVRFS model were overlooked in 
the previous version of this Scientific Analysis Report, there are differences between output 
DTNs: SN9908T0581999.001 and SN0407T0504404.002. However, these changes have no 
significant impact in the calibration or flow paths of the base-case SZ site-scale model that affect 
the performance of the SZ barrier (see Section 6.7). The majority of the recharge entering the 
base-case SZ site-scale flow model occurs in the northern part of the model domain. An 
estimated rate of 24.4 kg/s (7.70  105 m3/year) of groundwater enters the saturated-zone system 
as recharge in the base-case SZ site-scale model area. Of this rate, about 6.70 kg/s 
(2.11  105 m3/year) occurs in the area of the 1997 UZ site-scale flow model and about 1.93 kg/s 
(6.09  104 m3/year) is a result of focused recharge along Fortymile Wash. 
For completeness, the recharge extracted from the 1997 DVRFS with zonation neglected, which 
was used in the base-case SZ site-scale flow model, is presented in Figure 6-11. An estimated 
rate of 48.9 kg/s (1.54  106 m3/year) of groundwater enters the system as recharge in the 
base-case SZ site-scale model area. Of this rate, about 6.70 kg/s (2.11  105 m3/year) occurs in 
the area of the 1997 UZ site-scale flow model and about 3.00 kg/s (9.47  104 m3/year) is a result 
of focused recharge along Fortymile Wash. These values were used when calibrating the 
base-case SZ site-scale flow model. 
6.4.2 2001 DVRFS Model and 2003 UZ Site-Scale Flow Model 
The results of the combined estimates of recharge from distributed recharge on a 500  500 m2 
grid from the 2001 DVRFS model (DTN: GS040308312144.001 [DIRS 171472]), recharge in 
the area of the 2003 UZ site-scale flow model (LB03023DSSCP9I.001 [DIRS: 163044]), and 
focused recharge along Fortymile Wash (DTN: MO0102DQRGWREC.001 [DIRS 155523]), are 
shown graphically in Figure 6-12 and presented in output DTN: SN0407T0504404.002. The 
majority of the recharge entering the system in the area of the alternate SZ site-scale flow model 
occurs in the northern part of the model domain. An estimated rate of 77.3 kg/s 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 6-23 October 2004 
(2.44  106 m3/year) of groundwater enters the system as recharge in the alternate SZ site-scale 
model domain. Of this rate, about 5.58 kg/s (1.76  105 m3/year) occurs in the area of the UZ 
site-scale flow model, and about 1.97 kg/s (6.22  104 m3/year) is a result of focused recharge 
along Fortymile Wash. 
535000 540000 545000 550000 555000 560000 
UTM Easting (m) 
4050000 
4055000 
4060000 
4065000 
4070000 
4075000 
4080000 
4085000 
4090000 
UTM Northing (m) 
0
0.5 
1
1.5 
2
2.5 
3
3.5 
4
4.5 
5
5.5 
6
6.5 
7
7.5 
8
8.5 
9
9.5 
10 
Recharge 
(mm/yr) 
Output DTN: SN0407T0504404.002. 
Figure 6-10. Correct Recharge for the Base-Case SZ Site-Scale Flow Model, which were not used in 
model calibration, on a 500-m Grid from the 1997 DVRFS, 1997 UZ Site-Scale Flow Model, 
and Fortymile Wash 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 6-24 October 2004 
535000 540000 545000 550000 555000 560000 
UTM Easting (m) 
4050000 
4055000 
4060000 
4065000 
4070000 
4075000 
4080000 
4085000 
4090000 
UTM Northing (m) 
0
0.5 
1
1.5 
2
2.5 
3
3.5 
4
4.5 
5
5.5 
6
6.5 
7
7.5 
8
8.5 
9
9.5 
10 
Recharge 
(mm/yr) 
Output DTN: SN9908T0581999.001. 
Figure 6-11. Recharge Used to Calibrate the Base-Case SZ Site-Scale Flow Model on a 500-m Grid 
from the 1997 DVRFS, 1997 UZ Site-Scale Flow Model, and Fortymile Wash 
6.4.3 Differences in Distributed Recharge between 1997 and 2001 DVRFS Models and 
1997 and 2003 UZ Site-Scale Flow Models 
Table 6-4 compares the distributed recharges of the 1997 DVRFS and 1997 UZ site-scale models 
and Fortymile Wash, to the distributed recharges of the 2001 DVRFS and the 2003 UZ site-scale 
flow models and Fortymile Wash. Differences in infiltration through Fortymile Wash are due to 
the translation of the alternate SZ site-scale flow model with respect to the base-case SZ 
site-scale flow model (see Section 6.3.2). 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 6-25 October 2004 
6.5 LATERAL BOUNDARY FLUXES 
6.5.1 1997 DVRFS Model 
The cell-by-cell flow terms extracted from the 1997 DVRFS model (using qualified codes) are 
given in Tables 6-5 to 6-8 and presented in file, boundaries.xls, in output 
DTN: SN0407T0504404.002. Note that results are identical to those presented in 
DTN: SN9908T0581999.001 (compare Tables A-1 and 6-5, Tables A-2 and 6-6, Tables A-3 
and 6-7, and Tables A-4 and 6-8). 
Output DTN: SN0407T0504404.002. 
Figure 6-12. Recharge for the Alternate SZ Site-Scale Flow Model on a 500-m Grid from the 2001 
DVRFS, 2003 UZ Site-Scale Flow Model, and Fortymile Wash 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 6-26 October 2004 
Table 6-4. Comparison of Distributed Recharges between Different Model Simulations 
Models 
Fortymile Wash 
(kg/s) 
DVRFS model 
(kg/s) 
UZ site-scale flow model 
(kg/s) 
1997a 1.93 18.9 6.70 
1997b 3.00c 48.9d 6.70 
2001/2003a 1.97e 74.3 5.58 
aDTN: SN0407T0504404.002. 
bDTN: SN9908T0581999.001. 
cOutput from 1997 DVRFS using 125-m grid resolution (see Section 6.2.3). 
dOutput from 1997 DVRFS without taking zonation into account (see Section 6.2.1.1). 
eThe difference between 1997a and 2001/2003a models is due to translation of SZ site-scale model 
domain (see Section 6.2.3). 
One important feature must be pointed out. Summing the lateral and only the 1997 DVRFS 
distributed recharge fluxes (no UZ or Fortymile Wash data used) does not yield a mass balance. 
This is because in the 1997 DVRFS there were 25 pumping wells represented in the model that 
lie within the domain of the base-case SZ site-scale flow model. Thus, the sum of fluxes is 
101 kg/s too high, an amount equal to that pumped from the 1997 DVRFS model within the 
base-case SZ site-scale domain. This discrepancy was handled implicitly in the SZ site-scale 
flow model because flow through the south boundary was allowed to fluctuate to ensure 
conservation of mass. Lateral flow data developed from the 1997 DVRFS model are found in 
output DTN: SN0407T0504404.002. These tables contain the flow terms as calculated by 
MODFLOWP (V 2.3 STN: 10144-2.3-00 [DIRS 150454]) in units of cubic meters per day. The 
final column of each table is the sum of the terms for the three model layers for each row/column 
position. Flow terms for the west and east boundaries are for the right (east) cell faces, and terms 
for the north and south boundaries are for the south (front) faces. Row, column, and layer 
numbers are those of the 1997 DVRFS model grid. 
The total mass fluxes (kg/s) for segments along the west, north, and east site model boundaries 
follow. These boundaries are used as target boundary conditions in the base-case SZ site-scale 
flow model. The fluxes are for the boundaries of a region that is shifted 2 m north relative to the 
domain of the base-case SZ site-scale model, because the cell faces of the regional and site-scale 
models did not precisely match. This 2-m shift is assumed to have negligible impact on the 
interpretation of the lateral boundary conditions because the fluxes change by no more than 
0.1 percent over a 2-m distance (across a 1,500-m cell). The coordinates of the boundary 
segments are in UTM (meters). Fluxes are the total flux for that boundary segment, from the 
water table to a depth of 2,750 m (i.e., all three layers of the 1997 DVRFS model). A positive 
value indicates flow into the base-case SZ site-scale model domain. 
West Boundary: 
from y = 4,046,780 to 4,054,280: flux = 3.45 kg/s 
from y = 4,054,280 to 4,063,280: flux = +71.0 
from y = 4,063,280 to 4,072,280: flux = +6.90 
from y = 4,072,280 to 4,082,780: flux = 2.73 
from y = 4,082,780 to 4,091,780: flux = +47.0 
Sum = +119 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 6-27 October 2004 
East Boundary: 
from y = 4,046,780 to 4,058,780: flux = +555 kg/s 
from y = 4,058,780 to 4,081,280: flux = +5.46 
from y = 4,081,280 to 4,087,280: flux = 2.65 
from y = 4,087,280 to 4,091,780: flux = +3.07 
Sum = +561 
North Boundary: 
from x = 533,340 to 543,840: flux = +102 kg/s 
from x = 543,840 to 552,840: flux = +18.9 
from x = 552,840 to 560,340: flux = +64.7 
from x = 560,340 to 563,340: flux = +10.6 
Sum = +196 
South Boundary: 
from x = 533,000 to 563,000: flux = 790 kg/s 
Table 6-5. Cell-by-Cell Flow Terms (m3/day) from the 1997 DVRFS Model along the West Boundary of 
the Site-Scale Model 
Column Row Layer1 Layer2 Layer3 Sum 
62 66 3.00102 1.16102 1.73102 5.89102 
62 67 3.85102 1.29102 2.84102 7.98102 
62 68 9.13101 1.19102 1.83102 3.93102 
62 69 8.16101 5.29102 1.64102 7.74102 
62 70 1.20102 7.62102 1.18102 9.99102 
62 71 1.02102 2.26102 1.77102 5.06102 
62 72 3.59100 4.58100 4.59100 1.28101 
62 73 9.55101 1.60100 -2.02101 2.35100 
62 74 -4.32101 -7.44101 2.24101 -4.37101 
62 75 -2.30101 -5.38101 1.96100 -2.15101 
62 76 -2.66101 -5.57101 2.17100 -2.50101 
62 77 -1.33102 -6.12101 1.85100 -1.31102 
62 78 -3.07101 -1.97101 1.39100 -2.95101 
62 79 6.78101 1.51101 1.05100 6.90101 
62 80 9.91101 2.88101 9.30101 1.00102 
62 81 1.03102 2.19101 6.03101 1.03102 
62 82 1.51102 5.85101 4.22101 1.52102 
62 83 3.38101 4.75101 6.81101 3.50101 
62 84 2.35101 1.12102 8.07101 1.36102 
62 85 1.16102 1.57102 4.55101 3.18102 
62 86 5.45102 2.27102 6.57102 1.43103 
62 87 4.35102 6.45102 7.99102 1.88103 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 6-28 October 2004 
Table 6-5. Cell-by-Cell Flow Terms (m3/day) from the 1997 DVRFS Model along the West Boundary of 
the Site-Scale Model (Continued) 
Column Row Layer1 Layer2 Layer3 Sum 
62 88 3.89102 5.83102 3.17101 1.00103 
62 89 3.40102 4.82102 1.60101 8.38102 
62 90 6.31101 6.05102 -1.81100 6.66102 
62 91 -7.49101 7.44100 -1.93100 4.75100 
62 92 -5.17101 -1.19100 -2.17100 -5.51101 
62 93 -5.98101 -2.57100 -2.68100 -6.51101 
62 94 -8.07101 -3.55100 -3.71100 -8.80101 
62 95 -8.60101 -4.20100 -4.31100 -9.45101 
NOTE: A qualified version of MODFLOWP was used to generate these data. 
Source: DTN: SN0407T0504404.002 in file boundaries.xls. 
Table 6-6. Cell-by-Cell Flow Terms (m3/day) from the 1997 DVRFS Model along the East Boundary of 
the Site-Scale Model 
Column Row Layer1 Layer2 Layer3 Sum 
82 66 3.51101 1.04102 1.03100 1.40102 
82 67 3.25101 5.95101 2.87100 9.49101 
82 68 1.03101 1.79101 1.85100 3.01101 
82 69 -3.49100 -6.73100 1.90103 -1.02101 
82 70 -2.13101 -3.07101 1.63102 -5.19101 
82 71 -3.12101 -4.06101 2.09102 -7.18101 
82 72 -9.51101 -1.51102 8.80103 -9.51101 
82 73 9.57102 2.22101 1.12101 2.24101 
82 74 -2.53102 -4.91100 3.11101 -4.63100 
82 75 5.17100 3.82101 3.19101 4.36101 
82 76 5.32100 3.25101 1.42101 5.21101 
82 77 2.31101 2.99101 3.69101 8.99101 
82 78 2.12101 1.98101 1.42101 5.52101 
82 79 5.62100 1.58101 4.42100 2.58101 
82 80 1.43100 1.89100 -6.96101 2.62100 
82 81 4.41100 1.34100 -4.22102 5.71100 
82 82 1.43101 3.25100 4.38102 1.76101 
82 83 1.34101 3.52100 -7.69101 1.61101 
82 84 7.09100 2.99100 -1.49100 8.59100 
82 85 6.22100 5.05100 1.85101 1.14101 
82 86 2.93101 5.40100 3.13101 6.61101 
82 87 1.97100 1.62101 4.11101 5.93101 
82 88 2.85101 1.55103 3.12103 4.67103 
82 89 3.89101 2.09103 4.15103 6.24103 
82 90 4.16101 2.23103 4.42103 6.65103 
82 91 4.11101 2.20103 4.39103 6.59103 
82 92 3.20100 2.14103 4.30103 6.45103 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 6-29 October 2004 
Table 6-6. Cell-by-Cell Flow Terms (m3/day) from the 1997 DVRFS Model along the East Boundary of 
the Site-Scale Model (Continued) 
Column Row Layer1 Layer2 Layer3 Sum 
82 93 5.17100 2.06103 4.21103 6.27103 
82 94 1.45101 1.85103 3.99103 5.86103 
82 95 1.38101 1.56103 3.69103 5.26103 
NOTE: A qualified version of MODFLOWP was used to generate these data. 
Source: DTN: SN0407T0504404.002 in file boundaries.xls. 
Table 6-7. Cell-by-Cell Flow Terms (m3/day) from the 1997 DVRFS Model along the North Boundary of 
the Site-Scale Model 
Column Row Layer1 Layer2 Layer3 Sum 
63 65 4.37102 1.59102 8.89101 6.84102 
64 65 4.45102 6.66102 1.27102 1.24103 
65 65 4.70102 7.05102 1.42102 1.32103 
66 65 4.97102 7.43102 1.46102 1.39103 
67 65 5.11102 7.67102 1.41102 1.42103 
68 65 5.13102 7.71102 1.31102 1.42103 
69 65 5.00102 7.03102 1.17102 1.32103 
70 65 9.00101 1.24102 9.94101 3.14102 
71 65 9.43101 1.36102 7.92101 3.09102 
72 65 8.19101 1.26102 5.47101 2.63102 
73 65 7.92101 1.22102 4.55101 2.47102 
74 65 8.18101 1.24102 2.46100 2.08102 
75 65 7.81100 2.08102 3.32100 2.89102 
76 65 7.14101 8.35102 2.45101 9.31102 
77 65 7.71101 9.12102 2.49101 1.01103 
78 65 8.48101 9.90102 2.64101 1.10103 
79 65 1.61102 1.06103 2.73101 1.25103 
80 65 1.67102 1.10103 2.75101 1.30103 
81 65 2.05102 3.22102 3.82101 5.65102 
82 65 8.24101 2.26102 4.55101 3.54102 
NOTE: A qualified version of MODFLOWP was used to generate these data. 
Source: DTN: SN0407T0504404.002 in file boundaries.xls. 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 6-30 October 2004 
Table 6-8. Cell-by-Cell Flow Terms (m3/day) from the 1997 DVRFS Model along the South Boundary of 
the Site-Scale Model 
Column Row Layer1 Layer2 Layer3 Sum 
63 95 -1.02101 -2.70101 -2.39100 -3.96101 
64 95 -1.62102 -6.53101 -3.15100 -2.31102 
65 95 -8.26101 -7.57102 -1.66102 -1.01103 
66 95 -3.59102 -6.01102 -1.93102 -1.15103 
67 95 -3.71102 -6.12102 -2.43102 -1.23103 
68 95 -5.12102 -7.55102 -2.49102 -1.52103 
69 95 -5.56102 -8.30102 -1.31103 -2.70103 
70 95 -5.92102 -8.86102 -1.35103 -2.82103 
71 95 -6.10102 -9.14102 -1.43103 -2.96103 
72 95 -5.58102 -8.54102 -1.37103 -2.78103 
73 95 -4.87102 -7.49102 -1.28103 -2.52103 
74 95 -2.97102 -4.63102 -1.19103 -1.95103 
75 95 -1.34102 -4.55101 -1.07103 -1.25103 
76 95 -7.59101 -3.54101 -5.42101 -1.66102 
77 95 -1.03100 1.62101 2.18101 3.70101 
78 95 -1.02101 -9.78101 -1.52102 -2.60102 
79 95 -6.43100 -3.47103 -7.41103 -1.09104 
80 95 -5.33100 -3.42103 -7.54103 -1.10104 
81 95 -3.20101 -3.66103 -7.83103 -1.15104 
82 95 -3.58101 -4.12103 -8.15103 -1.23104 
NOTE: A qualified version of MODFLOWP was used to generate these data. 
Source: DTN: SN0407T0504404.002 in file boundaries.xls 
6.5.2 2001 DVRFS Model 
The cell-by-cell flow terms extracted from the 2001 DVRFS model are presented in Tables 6-9 
to 6-12 (note that the 2001 DVRFS model has 15 layers as opposed to three in the 1997 DVRFS 
model). The data are also found in boundaries.xls in output DTN: SN0407T0504404.002. This 
file contains the flow terms as calculated by MODFLOW-2000 in units of cubic meters per day. 
The total mass fluxes (kilograms per second) from the 2001 DVRFS model for segments along 
the west, north, and east site model boundaries that follow are grouped according to flow 
similarities. These boundary fluxes are used as calibration targets for the alternate SZ site-scale 
flow model. The coordinates of the boundary segments are in UTM (m). Fluxes are the total 
flux for that boundary segment, from the water table to a depth of 2,750 m (i.e., all 15 layers of 
the 2001 DVRFS model). A positive value indicates flow into the alternate SZ site-scale flow 
model. Flux segments differ from the 1997 model because of the different distribution of flow. 
Segments were partitioned to group like flows (i.e., high and low flow areas were grouped 
separately). 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 6-31 October 2004 
Table 6-9. Cell-by-Cell Flow Terms (m3/day) from the 2001 DVRFS Model along the West Boundary of the Site-Scale Model 
Col Layer Row86 Row87 Row88 Row89 Row90 Row91 Row92 Row93 Row94 Row95 Row96 Row97 Row98 Row99 Row100 Row101 Row102 Row103 Row104 Row105 Row106 Row107 Row108 Row109 Row110 Row111 Row112 Row113 Row114 Row115 
64 1 1.70101 3.65101 5.56101 8.09101 -1.00102 -2.10101 5.11100 4.56100 4.62100 6.00102 3.00102 2.00102 1.00102 0.00100 0.00100 -7.62100 1.37101 8.75101 1.38102 1.59102 2.20102 3.51102 1.93101 0.00100 3.54100 -1.70101 4.00101 -4.00102 -4.00102 -6.00102 
64 2 1.70101 3.65101 5.56101 8.09101 -1.00102 7.00102 7.93100 5.97100 4.54100 6.00102 3.00102 2.00102 1.00102 3.00102 0.00100 -7.60100 1.37101 5.17101 1.38102 1.59102 2.20102 3.20102 0.00100 0.00100 7.00102 -1.00101 3.30101 -4.00102 -4.00102 -6.00102 
64 3 1.70101 3.65101 5.56101 8.08101 -1.00102 2.90101 0.00100 5.98100 4.49100 6.00102 3.00102 2.00102 1.00102 1.00102 0.00100 -7.49100 1.06101 8.58100 1.38102 1.59102 2.21102 7.54101 0.00100 0.00100 7.00102 -1.00102 4.00102 -3.00102 -4.00102 -1.20101 
64 4 3.39101 7.31101 1.11102 1.61102 -1.00102 4.00101 1.00102 1.20101 8.66100 1.20101 6.00102 3.00102 2.00102 2.00102 0.00100 -4.00102 1.61101 3.99101 3.96102 4.52102 2.16102 1.19102 0.00100 3.00102 7.00102 0.00100 8.00102 -6.00102 -1.30101 -1.90101 
64 5 3.38101 7.32101 1.12102 1.61102 -1.10101 3.50101 4.20101 1.00102 8.00102 3.00102 2.00102 3.00102 2.00102 2.00102 0.00100 -2.00102 2.74101 2.77101 6.64101 9.32101 7.52101 3.06101 1.00102 4.00102 7.00102 1.00102 7.00102 -8.00102 -1.10101 -2.49102 
64 6 3.37101 7.34101 1.13102 1.26101 -5.00102 4.80101 3.00100 1.90100 1.85100 3.00102 2.00102 1.00102 1.00102 5.00102 0.00100 -1.00102 5.09101 2.47101 5.62101 7.53101 7.54101 4.00102 1.00102 4.00102 8.00102 2.00102 7.00102 -9.00102 -2.64102 -3.30102 
64 7 3.35101 7.36101 1.14102 2.00102 0.00100 7.50101 2.77100 2.49100 1.07100 8.00102 2.00102 1.00102 1.00102 4.00102 0.00100 -1.00102 1.86102 2.51101 3.96101 5.64101 6.59101 3.00102 1.00102 4.00102 8.00102 3.00102 7.00102 -1.10101 -3.37102 -3.37102 
64 8 3.33101 7.40101 1.14102 0.00100 0.00100 9.00101 2.50100 2.53100 1.00101 8.00102 2.00102 1.00102 1.00102 4.00102 0.00100 -1.00102 -1.27101 2.58101 4.00101 5.72101 3.00102 3.00102 1.00102 4.00102 8.00102 4.00102 5.00102 -1.20101 -3.30102 -3.54102 
64 9 3.30101 7.47101 7.89101 -2.00102 0.00100 1.01100 2.23100 2.50100 9.00102 8.00102 6.00102 3.00102 2.00102 3.00102 0.00100 -1.00102 0.00100 4.90100 3.83100 1.01101 3.00102 3.00102 1.00102 3.00102 8.00102 6.00102 4.00102 -1.11102 -3.25102 -3.81102 
64 10 3.28101 7.55101 3.00102 -4.00102 0.00100 1.10100 2.05100 2.40100 9.00102 8.00102 6.00102 3.00102 2.00102 1.00102 0.00100 -1.00102 0.00100 0.00100 1.00102 1.00102 2.00102 1.00102 1.00102 3.00102 9.00102 7.00102 2.00102 -4.27102 -3.21102 -4.10102 
64 11 4.89101 1.08102 4.00102 -4.30101 0.00100 1.76100 2.87100 3.27100 1.30101 1.10101 9.00102 4.00102 2.00102 2.00102 0.00100 -1.00102 0.00100 1.00102 1.00102 2.00102 3.00102 2.00102 1.00102 5.00102 1.40101 1.90101 8.00102 -6.59102 -4.78102 -6.72102 
64 12 6.30101 2.00102 2.00102 -1.00101 2.70101 2.42100 3.80100 1.80101 1.60101 1.50101 1.20101 6.00102 3.00102 2.00102 0.00100 -1.00102 0.00100 6.00102 3.00102 3.00102 3.00102 3.00102 2.00102 6.00102 1.90101 2.30101 -2.00102 -9.04102 -6.29102 -9.47102 
64 13 0.00100 2.00102 3.00102 -1.00101 1.93100 3.11100 4.17100 2.10101 1.90101 1.90101 1.40101 7.00102 2.00102 3.00102 0.00100 -1.00102 0.00100 3.00102 2.00102 2.00102 2.00102 3.00102 2.00102 7.00102 2.50101 3.20101 -2.00101 -1.13103 -7.63102 -1.20103 
64 14 0.00100 2.00102 6.00102 0.00100 2.35100 3.43100 2.20101 2.00101 1.70101 1.00101 7.00102 4.00102 2.00102 3.00102 1.00102 -1.00102 0.00100 2.00102 2.00102 2.00102 2.00102 3.00102 2.00102 7.00102 2.70101 2.90101 -7.59102 -9.96102 -7.40102 -1.17103 
64 15 0.00100 2.00102 8.00102 0.00100 2.61100 1.80100 2.70101 2.30101 1.80101 1.10101 9.00102 5.00102 3.00102 3.00102 1.00102 -1.00102 0.00100 3.00102 2.00102 2.00102 2.00102 4.00102 3.00102 8.00102 3.30101 3.30101 -1.10103 -5.00101 -5.33102 -1.33103 
Source: DTN: SN0407T0504404.002 in file boundaries.xls. 
Table 6-10. Cell-by-Cell Flow Terms (m3/day) from the 2001 DVRFS Model along the East Boundary of the Site-Scale Model 
Col Layer Row86 Row87 Row88 Row89 Row90 Row91 Row92 Row93 Row94 Row95 Row96 Row97 Row98 Row99 Row100 Row101 Row102 Row103 Row104 Row105 Row106 Row107 Row108 Row109 Row110 Row111 Row112 Row113 Row114 Row115 
84 1 2.32101 2.34101 1.96101 1.28101 0.00100 0.00100 -2.00101 0.00100 1.32101 7.02101 5.99101 5.38101 5.24101 5.36101 5.63101 6.01101 6.51101 7.19101 7.97101 2.63101 1.68101 1.83101 -4.00102 2.90101 1.50101 1.75100 5.44100 1.58100 1.32100 1.26100 
84 2 3.89100 1.03101 1.95101 6.38100 0.00100 0.00100 -2.00101 0.00100 0.00100 7.02101 5.99101 5.38101 5.24101 5.36101 5.63101 6.01101 6.51101 7.18101 6.91101 1.96101 1.69101 1.82101 -1.00102 1.20101 1.10101 1.00102 5.45100 1.57100 1.32100 1.26100 
84 3 0.00100 0.00100 2.66100 5.94100 2.09100 -6.00102 -1.90101 0.00100 0.00100 7.02101 6.00101 5.38101 5.24101 5.36101 5.63101 6.01101 6.51101 7.18101 4.18101 1.36101 1.69101 1.81101 0.00100 3.00102 8.00102 1.00102 8.51100 1.56100 1.32100 1.26100 
84 4 0.00100 0.00100 0.00100 0.00100 0.00100 -5.30101 -3.80101 1.00102 0.00100 7.30101 1.20102 1.08102 1.05102 1.07102 1.13102 1.20102 1.30102 1.43102 7.97101 2.76101 3.40101 3.59101 0.00100 6.00102 2.00102 2.00102 2.30101 3.08100 2.63100 2.52100 
84 5 0.00100 0.00100 0.00100 0.00100 0.00100 -5.10101 -3.80101 0.00100 0.00100 0.00100 1.20102 1.08102 1.05102 1.07102 1.13102 1.20102 1.30102 9.16101 5.54101 2.81101 3.42101 3.54101 0.00100 3.00102 1.00102 2.00102 2.00102 5.76100 2.62100 2.51100 
84 6 0.00100 0.00100 0.00100 0.00100 0.00100 -4.90101 -3.70101 0.00100 0.00100 0.00100 1.16102 1.08102 1.05102 1.07102 1.13102 1.20102 1.30102 7.21101 2.33101 2.88101 3.44101 3.47101 0.00100 3.00102 1.00102 3.00102 6.00102 1.80102 2.60100 2.51100 
84 7 0.00100 0.00100 0.00100 0.00100 0.00100 -4.70101 -3.70101 6.00102 0.00100 0.00100 8.00101 1.08102 1.05102 1.07102 1.13102 1.20102 1.01102 4.81101 2.30101 2.94101 3.46101 3.42101 0.00100 2.00102 1.00102 1.00102 1.00102 1.95102 2.57100 2.51100 
84 8 0.00100 0.00100 0.00100 0.00100 0.00100 -4.60101 -3.90101 -3.60101 0.00100 0.00100 8.01101 1.08102 1.05102 1.07102 1.13102 1.21102 6.75101 2.04101 2.39101 3.00101 3.48101 3.41101 0.00100 2.00102 1.00102 1.00102 1.96100 1.93102 1.24102 2.50100 
84 9 0.00100 0.00100 0.00100 0.00100 -2.60101 -4.60101 -4.00101 -3.60101 0.00100 0.00100 4.84101 1.08102 1.05102 1.07102 1.13102 8.54101 6.20101 2.10101 2.47101 3.05101 3.50101 3.42101 0.00100 2.00102 1.00102 0.00100 1.40101 1.90102 1.73102 5.27101 
84 10 0.00100 0.00100 0.00100 0.00100 -2.50101 -4.60101 -4.10101 -3.70101 0.00100 0.00100 0.00100 1.08102 1.05102 1.03102 8.00101 6.05101 1.89101 2.17101 2.55101 3.10101 3.52101 3.47101 1.00102 2.00102 1.00102 0.00100 1.39101 1.88102 1.70102 1.66102 
84 11 0.00100 1.30101 6.00102 1.00102 -2.80101 -6.90101 -6.40101 -5.80101 0.00100 0.00100 0.00100 1.09102 1.39102 9.55101 8.65101 8.36101 2.89101 3.36101 3.95101 4.73101 5.33101 2.51101 1.00102 2.00102 0.00100 0.00100 2.13101 2.77102 2.49102 2.44102 
84 12 2.30101 1.90101 1.30101 3.00102 -2.50101 -9.20101 -9.10101 -8.30101 -2.00102 0.00100 0.00100 1.08102 1.06102 1.08102 9.60101 3.80101 4.03101 4.65101 5.46101 6.43101 7.10101 8.00102 1.00102 2.00102 -1.00102 0.00100 3.05101 3.34102 3.17102 3.16102 
84 13 2.80101 2.30101 1.60101 6.00102 -1.80101 -1.17100 -1.24100 -1.16100 -9.60101 -2.70101 7.71100 4.83100 1.00102 6.17101 4.41101 4.63101 5.25101 6.05101 7.06101 8.17101 8.39101 5.00102 1.00102 2.00102 -4.00102 0.00100 4.55101 2.00102 3.63102 3.79102 
84 14 2.80101 2.20101 1.60101 7.00102 -9.00102 -1.21100 -7.90101 -3.00102 -8.00101 -4.20101 8.66101 6.14101 3.94101 3.95101 4.33101 4.79101 5.42101 6.24101 7.24101 8.25101 7.81101 5.00102 2.00102 2.00102 -3.00102 3.11101 4.74101 3.00102 3.48102 3.65102 
84 15 3.30101 2.60101 1.90101 1.00101 -6.00102 -1.50100 -4.00102 -3.00102 -3.00101 -4.00101 1.05102 7.37101 5.05101 4.89101 5.30101 5.87101 6.63101 7.62101 8.81101 9.96101 9.00101 6.00102 2.00102 2.00102 -2.00102 4.16101 5.28101 1.00102 4.06102 4.27102 
Source: DTN: SN0407T0504404.002 in file boundaries.xls. 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 6-32 October 2004 
Table 6-11. Cell-by-Cell Flow Terms (m3/day) from the 2001 DVRFS Model along the North Boundary of the Site-Scale Model 
Row Layer Col65 Col66 Col67 Col68 Col69 Col70 Col71 Col72 Col73 Col74 Col75 Col76 Col77 Col78 Col79 Col80 Col81 Col82 Col83 Col84 
85 1 9.44101 1.05102 1.14102 1.22102 1.30102 1.41102 1.52102 1.59102 1.58102 1.37102 8.69101 4.93101 2.15101 -9.40101 -9.30101 -8.07101 -2.63101 5.61100 4.28101 5.54100 
85 2 9.44101 1.05102 1.14102 1.22102 1.30102 1.41102 1.52102 1.59102 1.58102 1.37102 8.70101 4.93101 2.15101 -8.60101 -1.22101 -8.10101 -2.66101 5.20100 4.26101 2.79100 
85 3 9.45101 1.05102 1.14102 1.22102 1.30102 1.41102 1.52102 1.59102 1.58102 1.37102 8.70101 4.93101 2.15101 -7.90101 -1.22101 -8.07101 -2.69101 0.00100 4.35100 2.71100 
85 4 1.89102 2.10102 2.28102 2.43102 2.59102 2.82102 3.03102 3.18102 3.16102 2.74102 1.74102 9.86101 4.29101 -1.38100 -2.40101 -4.72100 -4.21101 4.70101 3.85100 0.00100 
85 5 1.89102 2.10102 2.28102 2.43102 2.60102 2.82102 3.04102 3.18102 3.16102 2.74102 1.74102 9.88101 4.29101 -1.15100 -2.31101 5.81100 1.01100 1.96100 0.00100 0.00100 
85 6 1.89102 2.10102 2.28102 2.44102 2.60102 2.82102 3.04102 3.18102 3.16102 2.75102 1.74102 9.90101 4.30101 -9.30101 -2.25101 4.34100 3.04100 9.00102 0.00100 0.00100 
85 7 1.90102 2.10102 2.28102 2.44102 2.60102 2.82102 3.04102 3.19102 3.14102 2.61102 1.57102 7.38101 4.61101 0.00100 -2.23101 3.05100 0.00100 0.00100 0.00100 0.00100 
85 8 1.90102 2.11102 2.29102 2.45102 2.61102 2.82102 3.05102 2.48102 9.00102 8.00102 6.00102 3.00102 2.00102 0.00100 -1.79101 1.94100 0.00100 0.00100 0.00100 0.00100 
85 9 1.90102 2.11102 2.30102 2.45102 2.62102 2.82102 3.06102 1.20101 5.00102 4.00102 3.00102 2.00102 1.00102 0.00100 -1.48101 8.30101 0.00100 0.00100 0.00100 0.00100 
85 10 1.91102 2.12102 2.30102 2.46102 2.62102 2.82102 3.06102 6.00102 5.00102 4.00102 3.00102 2.00102 1.00102 0.00100 0.00100 3.00102 0.00100 0.00100 0.00100 0.00100 
85 11 2.88102 3.20102 3.47102 3.70102 3.95102 4.24102 5.81101 8.00102 7.00102 7.00102 4.00102 3.00102 1.00102 1.00102 1.00102 0.00100 0.00100 0.00100 0.00100 0.00100 
85 12 1.13101 1.50101 1.92101 2.45101 3.22101 4.67101 6.00102 1.10101 1.00101 9.00102 6.00102 3.00102 1.00102 1.00102 1.60101 0.00100 0.00100 0.00100 0.00100 0.00100 
85 13 2.00102 2.00102 2.00102 2.00102 2.00102 4.00102 8.00102 1.40101 1.30101 1.20101 8.00102 4.00102 2.00102 3.00102 5.70101 0.00100 0.00100 0.00100 1.60101 3.40101 
85 14 3.00102 3.00102 2.00102 2.00102 3.00102 5.00102 9.00102 1.40101 1.30101 1.20101 8.00102 4.00102 2.00102 3.00102 6.00102 0.00100 0.00100 0.00100 3.60101 3.80101 
85 15 4.00102 4.00102 3.00102 3.00102 4.00102 7.00102 1.10101 1.60101 1.60101 1.50101 9.00102 4.00102 2.00102 4.00102 8.00102 1.00102 0.00100 0.00100 4.30101 4.60101 
Source: DTN: SN0407T0504404.002. 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 6-33 October 2004 
Table 6-12. Cell-by-Cell Flow Terms (m3/day) from the 2001 DVRFS Model along the South Boundary of the Site-Scale Model 
Row Layer Col65 Col66 Col67 Col68 Col69 Col70 Col71 Col72 Col73 Col74 Col75 Col76 Col77 Col78 Col79 Col80 Col81 Col82 Col83 Col84 
115 1 7.50101 5.27101 5.50101 1.22102 -1.90102 -1.31102 -1.16102 -1.16102 -1.13102 -1.07102 -1.05102 -1.11102 -1.24102 -1.40102 -1.37102 8.66100 4.72100 -3.50101 -1.16100 -1.31100 
115 2 7.50101 5.28101 5.50101 1.22102 -1.90102 -1.31102 -1.16102 -1.16102 -1.13102 -1.07102 -1.05102 -1.11102 -1.24102 -1.40102 -1.37102 8.67100 4.73100 -3.50101 -1.16100 -1.31100 
115 3 7.50101 2.65101 5.50101 1.22102 -1.90102 -1.31102 -1.16102 -1.16102 -1.13102 -1.07102 -1.05102 -1.11102 -1.24102 -1.40102 -1.37102 8.68100 4.74100 -3.50101 -1.16100 -1.31100 
115 4 1.48100 1.31101 2.12101 2.37102 -3.79102 -2.61102 -2.33102 -2.33102 -2.27102 -2.14102 -2.10102 -2.21102 -2.47102 -2.80102 -2.75102 1.74101 9.56100 -1.42100 -2.33100 -2.61100 
115 5 9.06101 1.73101 8.99100 3.55101 -3.77102 -2.61102 -2.32102 -2.33102 -2.27102 -2.13102 -2.10102 -2.21102 -2.48102 -2.80102 -2.75102 1.76101 5.67100 -2.88101 -2.34100 -2.61100 
115 6 8.56101 2.02101 8.49100 1.89101 -3.06102 -2.60102 -2.32102 -2.33102 -2.28102 -2.13102 -2.10102 -2.21102 -2.48102 -2.82102 -2.76102 1.60101 1.10101 -7.62101 -4.33100 -2.61100 
115 7 8.08101 2.22101 7.77100 1.69101 -6.08101 -2.59102 -2.31102 -2.34102 -2.28102 -2.13102 -2.10102 -2.22102 -2.48102 -2.83102 -2.76102 6.20101 2.00102 -7.64101 -4.80101 -2.60100 
115 8 7.65101 2.34101 6.83100 1.52101 -6.21101 -2.02102 -2.31102 -2.34102 -2.29102 -2.13102 -2.09102 -2.22102 -2.48102 -2.51102 -4.24101 9.10101 1.00102 -7.65101 -1.56102 -2.60100 
115 9 7.26101 2.41101 5.62100 1.37101 -3.46101 -4.22101 -2.30102 -2.35102 -2.30102 -2.13102 -2.09102 -2.22102 -2.49102 -5.65100 -6.04100 2.70101 0.00100 -7.61101 -1.54102 -9.07100 
115 10 6.88101 2.45101 4.10100 1.24101 -3.40101 -4.42101 -2.20102 -2.36102 -2.31102 -2.12102 -2.08102 -2.22102 -2.49102 -5.77100 -8.70101 1.70101 0.00100 -7.51101 -1.51102 -1.76102 
115 11 9.57101 2.16101 2.63100 1.63101 -4.99101 -4.95101 -5.28101 -3.55102 -3.49102 -3.18102 -3.11102 -3.33102 -3.73102 -9.75100 -1.17100 2.70101 -2.00102 -1.10102 -2.23102 -2.60102 
115 12 1.61101 2.00100 -3.29100 1.82101 -6.46101 -4.95101 -4.16101 -3.50102 -4.72102 -4.22102 -4.11102 -4.46102 -4.98102 -4.13100 -1.36100 3.00101 -3.13101 -1.38102 -2.90102 -3.41102 
115 13 2.27100 2.53100 -1.10101 1.82101 -7.87101 -6.16101 -5.45101 -6.77101 -6.42102 -5.23102 -5.07102 -5.59102 -1.87102 -1.57100 -4.35100 1.70101 -3.76101 -1.57102 -3.54102 -4.17102 
115 14 1.26100 2.41100 -1.50101 1.48101 -7.74101 -6.16101 -5.66101 -5.88101 -8.12102 -5.12102 -4.96102 -5.63102 -1.33100 -1.87100 -4.89100 -5.70101 -3.14101 -1.48102 -3.48102 -4.09102 
115 15 -4.35102 1.12100 -1.77101 1.52101 -9.21101 -7.40101 -6.93101 -7.33101 -1.21102 -1.18103 -6.47102 -2.05102 -2.55100 -5.31100 -5.94100 -2.60101 -3.22101 -1.69102 -4.14102 -4.85102 
Source: DTN: SN0407T0504404.002. 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 6-34 October 2004 
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 6-35 October 2004 
West Boundary: 
from y = 4,046,500 to 4,052,500: flux = 210. kg/s 
from y = 4,052,500 to 4,057,000: flux = +0.08 
from y = 4,057,000 to 4,067,500: flux = +56.1 
from y = 4,067,500 to 4,085,500: flux = +1.31 
from y = 4,085,500 to 4,091,500: flux = +28.4 
Sum = 124. 
East Boundary: 
from y = 4,046,500 to 4,054,000: flux = +69.7 kg/s 
from y = 4,054,000 to 4,058,500: flux = +0.01 
from y = 4,058,500 to 4,078,000: flux = +138.1 
from y = 4,078,000 to 4,084,000: flux = 0.09 
from y = 4,084,000 to 4,091,500: flux = +1.53 
Sum = +209. 
North Boundary: 
from x = 533,000 to 545,000: flux = +219. kg/s 
from x = 545,000 to 552,500: flux = +57.1 
from x = 552,500 to 558,500: flux = 6.90 
from x = 558,500 to 563,000: flux = +1.37 
Sum = +271. 
South Boundary: 
from x = 533,000 to 563,000: flux = 430. kg/s 
6.5.3 Differences in Lateral Recharge between 1997 and 2001 DVRFS Models and 1997 
and 2003 UZ Site-Scale Flow Models 
Because the number of layers in the 1997 and 2001 DVRFS models are different (three in the 
1997 model and 15 in the 2001 model), and because the number and location of segments across 
the boundary where flows are specified also differ, comparison of these models will be made on 
a boundary basis. Another reason is that the 1997 model represents conditions from the early 
1990s (there are active pumps in the model domain) and the 2001 DVRFS represents 
predevelopment conditions (no pumping in the model domain). Table 6-13 presents the total 
fluxes across each of the four boundaries of the SZ site-scale flow model domain within the 1997 
and 2001 DVRFS models and the percent difference with respect to the 1997 DVRFS model. 
Because these fluxes are calibration targets for the SZ site-scale flow model, it is expected that 
there will be some differences in the resulting SZ site-scale flow fields. 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 6-36 October 2004 
Table 6-13. Comparison of Fluxes (kg/s) through the Four Lateral Boundaries of the 1997 and 2001 
DVRFS Models 
Model 
East Boundary 
(kg/s) 
North Boundary 
(kg/s) 
West Boundary 
(kg/s) 
South Boundary 
(kg/s) 
1997 561 196 118 790a 
2001 209 271 125 430b 
% Difference 62.7% 38.4% 205%c 45.5% 
aThe flux through the south boundary reflects the inflow through the other three boundaries, the addition of 
distributed recharge, and the effect of pumping wells in the 1997 DVRFS, which withdraw 101 kg/s from the 
southeast corner of the model domain. 
bThe flux through the south boundary reflects the inflow through the other three boundaries plus the 
distributed recharge. 
cThis large discrepancy is due to the 1997 DVRFS model representing conditions of the early 1990s, which 
includes pumping, and the 2001 DVRFS model representing predevelopment conditions where there was 
no pumping. 
6.6 COMPARISON OF RESULTS FROM THE 1997 DVRFS AND 1997 UZ 
SITE-SCALE FLOW MODELS WITH PREVIOUS RESULTS 
Although the output data from this report relating to the 1997 DVRFS model and 1997 UZ 
site-scale flow model differ from those discussed in BSC (2001 [DIRS 164648]), the use of 
DTN: SN9908T0581999.001 has little impact on SZ model calibrations or results. A formal 
impact analysis follows. Tables A-1 through A-4 in Appendix A quantitatively compares 
recharge to the SZ site scale model from the UZ site-scale flow model domain calculated in this 
report and from Revision 0 of this report (DTN: SN 9908T0581999.001). 
6.7 IMPACT ANALYSIS 
Two primary issues are to be addressed in the impact analysis: (1) how a change in the 
distributed recharge by correctly accounting for MODFLOWP zones affects base-case SZ 
site-scale flow model calibration and flow paths, and (2) how proper accounting of the pumping 
wells from the 1997 DVRFS model within the SZ site-scale model domain impacts base-case SZ 
site-scale flow model calibration and flow paths. In the preceding revision of this report, 
distributed recharge was improperly calculated due to neglect/oversight of the recharge zones 
multiplier (equivalent to the Zones file from MODFLOW-2000). Furthermore, the impacts of 
pumping wells in the 1997 DVRFS within the SZ site-scale model domain were neglected. This 
leads to a mass balance discrepancy when considering the combined fluxes of the lateral 
boundaries and distributed recharge and this oversight is addressed in this Scientific Analysis 
Report revision. 
6.7.1 Corrected Distributed Recharge 
Now that this analysis has been updated to correctly take into account recharge zones in the 1997 
DVRFS model, the net distributed recharge (infiltration) to the SZ site-scale flow model is 
18.9 kg/s (5.96  105 m3/year) (down from 48.9 kg/s [1.54  106 m3/year]). The expected 
response of the base-case SZ site-scale flow model is that groundwater specific discharge is 
decreased, yielding longer radionuclide transport times from the repository. Quantitatively, a 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 6-37 October 2004 
forward run of the base-case SZ site-scale flow model using the corrected distributed recharge 
values yields heads that differ from the previously calibrated heads by less than 0.1 percent on 
average with a maximum discrepancy of 2.3 percent, and root mean square error (RMSE) of 
0.5 percent. This indicates that the flow paths are essentially unchanged. 
6.7.2 Correction for Pumping Wells 
Accounting for the pumping wells in the SZ site-scale model is not performed in such a 
quantitative manner. Fortunately, such a comparison is not needed because the base-case SZ 
site-scale flow model has implicitly taken into account the effect of these pumping wells through 
the calibration process to the heads in the southwest corner of the model that already reflect the 
influence of pumping. That is, although no pumping wells are explicitly included in the SZ 
site-scale flow model, the potentiometric data to which the model is calibrated include drawdown 
due to pumping in the Amargosa Valley (i.e., in the southwest region of the model domain). 
This calibration ultimately results in the base-case SZ site-scale modeling compensating for the 
absence of explicitly included pumping wells by increasing flux out through the southern 
boundary (i.e., in direct proportion to what would have otherwise been pumped from wells in the 
southwest corner). The net effect is minor and local to the southwest corner of the base-case SZ 
site-scale model where what might have otherwise been pumped water is rerouted a few 
kilometers south to exit the southern boundary. Overall, the flow paths emanating from the 
repository are virtually unchanged. 
6.7.3 Changes in Potentiometric Surface and Particle Paths 
To determine the impact on the performance of the SZ as a barrier to the transport of 
radionuclides from the repository due to a correction in the distributed recharge boundary 
condition, a comparison of head contours and particle tracks is made between runs of the 
base-case SZ site-scale flow model subject to both old (erroneous) and new (corrected) 
distributed recharge data sets. While the recharge data sets differ in both distribution and 
magnitude, overall, there is a decrease in net recharge in the corrected data set primarily in the 
northeast corner of the base-case SZ site-scale model domain. Figure 6-13 illustrates head 
contours of the base-case SZ site-scale flow model subject to the old (erroneous) surface 
recharge boundary condition (solid blue lines) and the new (corrected) surface recharge 
boundary condition (dashed red lines). Note that throughout the model domain there is generally 
quite a good agreement with the only significant change in potentiometric surface in the 
northeast corner. Interestingly, with the old (erroneous) surface recharge, there is a nonphysical 
buildup or mound of water in this region. Using the new (corrected) surface recharge eliminates 
this phenomenon. 
When comparing the heads at every node between model runs using the old and new surface 
recharge boundary conditions, the average difference in heads throughout the model domain was 
6.5 m (0.8 percent) with 95 percent of the differences less than 25 m. The only large 
differences in head, about 200 m, were in the northeast corner of the model domain. As for the 
heads at the wells used to calibrate the base-case SZ site-scale flow model, the average change in 
heads was 0.8 m (0.1 percent) with the RMSE head difference of 3.8 m (0.5 percent). 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 6-38 October 2004 
535000 540000 545000 550000 555000 560000 
UTM Easting (m) 
4050000 
4055000 
4060000 
4065000 
4070000 
4075000 
4080000 
4085000 
4090000 
UTM Northing (m) 
Figure 6-13. Comparison of Simulated Heads Measured in Meters Using the Old (erroneous) Recharge 
(blue) and the New (corrected) Recharge (red dashed) Boundary Conditions 
Particle tracks emanating from below the footprint of the repository were also examined for the 
base-case SZ site-scale flow model subject to both old and new surface recharge boundary 
conditions. Figures 6-13 and 6-14 compare both the potentiometric surface and particle paths 
from old and new surface recharge boundary conditions. It should be noted that this version of 
the model was run with unit porosity and no matrix diffusion. Results indicate that the 
difference in head in the northeast of the model domain do not significantly impact particle paths 
from the repository. It is difficult to discern a difference in particle tracks with the naked eye, 
but an analysis of the data revealed that on average, of the 100 particles released, those in the 
model subject to the corrected surface recharge boundary condition had longer transport times 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 6-39 October 2004 
due to a decreased specific discharge (average velocity). The average specific discharge 
decreased from 1.555 to 1.551 m/year, a difference of 0.3 percent. The path lines, however, 
remained relatively unchanged with the average length only decreasing by 5 m (0.03 percent). 
Overall, this comparison reveals that the correction to the distributed recharge boundary 
condition does not significantly impact the performance of the SZ as a barrier to radionuclide 
transport. Furthermore, where differences are noted, they tend to show improved repository 
performance through increased transport times and decreased velocities. 
535000 540000 545000 550000 555000 560000 
UTM Easting (m) 
4050000 
4055000 
4060000 
4065000 
4070000 
4075000 
4080000 
4085000 
4090000 
UTM Northing (m) 
Figure 6-14. Simulated Heads Measured in Meters (blue) and Particle Paths (red) for the Old 
(erroneous) Recharge 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 6-40 October 2004 
535000 540000 545000 550000 555000 560000 
UTM Easting (m) 
4050000 
4055000 
4060000 
4065000 
4070000 
4075000 
4080000 
4085000 
4090000 
UTM Northing (m) 
Figure 6-15. Simulated Heads Measured in Meters (blue) and Particle Paths (red) for the Corrected 
Recharge 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 7-1 October 2004 
7. CONCLUSIONS 
7.1 SUMMARY 
This analysis report produces three sets of distributed recharge and two sets of lateral boundary 
fluxes for application to SZ site-scale flow models. For application to the base-case SZ site-scale 
flow model, it extracts distributed recharge from the 1997 DVRFS with additions from the 1997 
UZ site-scale flow model and Fortymile Wash replacing the distributed recharge from the 1997 
DVRFS in the appropriate locations. Fortymile Wash data were extracted using 500-m grid 
spacing. These data may be found in wt_flow_500_1997.dat in DTN: SN0407T0504404.002. In 
addition, the distributed recharge calculated in the previous revision of this report is also 
presented where zonation in the 1997 DVRFS was neglected thereby yielding an erroneously 
high distributed recharge from this source. Again, additional recharge from the 1997 UZ 
site-scale flow model and Fortymile Wash, this time with a 125-m grid, replaced the distributed 
recharge from the 1997 DVRFS in the appropriate locations. These data, which were used in the 
base-case SZ site-scale flow model calibration, may be found in wt_flow_500.dat in 
DTN: SN9908T0581999.001. Finally, distributed recharge from the 2001 DVRFS, 2003 UZ 
site-scale flow model, and Fortymile Wash were extracted for application to the alternate SZ 
site-scale flow model and are found in wt_flow_500_2003.dat in DTN: SN0407T0504404.002. 
Lateral fluxes for the base-case SZ site-scale flow model from the 1997 DVRFS are found in 
boundaries.xls in both DTN: SN9908T0581999.001. Lateral fluxes for the alternate SZ 
site-scale flow model from the 2001 DVRFS are found in boundaries.xls in 
DTN: SN0407T0504404.002. 
To clarify, there are two output DTNs from this analysis report: DTN: SN9908T0581999.001 
and SN0407T0504404.002. DTN: SN9908T0581999.001 contains both the distributed recharge 
and lateral flux boundary conditions used to calibrate the base-case SZ site-scale flow model in 
files wt_flow_500.dat and boundaries.xls, respectively. DTN: SN0407T0504404.002 contains 
the corrected values for the distributed recharge as well as identical lateral flux boundary 
conditions in wt_flow_500_1997.dat and boundaries.xls, respectively. In addition, this DTN also 
contains distributed recharge and lateral flux boundary conditions that can be applied to the 
alternate SZ site-scale flow model in wt_flow_500_2003.dat and boundaries.xls, respectively. 
It should be noted that recharge data extracted from the 1997 and 2003 UZ site-scale flow model, 
while calculated subject to the same surface rate infiltration, have both different recharge 
magnitudes (due to a decrease in model domain area in the 2003 UZ site-scale flow model from 
the 1997 UZ site-scale flow model) and different distributions (due to the UZ focusing flow 
differently through newly identified and parameterized faults). Distributed recharges from the 
1997 and 2001 DVRFS models are significantly different both in magnitude and distribution 
(see Figures 6-1 and 6-3). Similarly, the lateral flows are also different in magnitude and 
distribution for these models (compare Tables 6-5 and 6-9, Tables 6-6 and 6-10, Tables 6-7 
and 6-11, and Tables 6-8 and 6-12). A note about uncertainty in the lateral and recharge fluxes 
calculated in this analysis is in order. While no attempt is made to explicitly quantify the 
uncertainties of the fluxes supplied in output DTN: SN9908T0581999.001 (or 
DTN: SN0407T0504404.002), clearly they inherit the uncertainties contained in the 1997 
DVRFS and 1997 UZ site-scale flow models and recharge estimates. Armed with knowledge of 
how the base-case SZ site-scale flow model calibration was achieved (BSC 2004 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 7-2 October 2004 
[DIRS 170037]), it is safe to say that all uncertainties in the flux boundary conditions computed 
in this model play only a minor role in overall calibration. Specifically, uncertainty in the 
distributed recharge, which is no more than 6 percent of the net influx into the base-case SZ 
site-scale flow and transport model, yields far less uncertainty in the site-scale model results than 
other uncertain parameters (e.g., groundwater specific discharge, flowing interval spacing, and 
distribution coefficients) (Arnold et al. 2003 [DIRS 163857]). In addition, the lateral fluxes 
supplied to the SZ site-scale flow model are used in a target calibration capacity only. 
7.2 HOW THE APPLICABLE ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA ARE ADDRESSED 
This section describes how this analysis report addresses the applicable acceptance criteria in the 
Yucca Mountain Review Plan, Final Report (NRC 2003 [DIRS 163274]). For this analysis 
report, the applicable acceptance criteria have been identified in Section 4.2. 
Acceptance Criteria from Section 2.2.1.3.8.3, Flow Paths in the Saturated Zone 
Acceptance Criterion 1: System Description and Model Integration Are Adequate. 
Subcriterion (1): The TSPA adequately incorporates important physical phenomena and uses 
consistent and appropriate assumptions, throughout the flow paths in the saturated zone 
abstraction process to the extent that this report simply extracts lateral and distributed fluxes 
from other models and published sources. Existing modeling and analysis results are the bases 
for estimating groundwater flow rates into the saturated zone site-scale model domains, both as 
recharge at the upper boundary and as underflow at the lateral boundaries. 
Subcriterion (2): The description of the aspects of hydrology, geology, geochemistry, design 
features, physical phenomena, and couplings, that may affect flow paths in the SZ, is adequate to 
the extent that the description of the aspects of hydrology that may affect flow paths in the 
saturated zone is described in Section 6.0. 
Subcriterion (4): Abstractions are based on boundary conditions consistent with site-scale 
modeling and regional models of the Death Valley groundwater flow system because the 
boundary conditions used in the TSPA-LA abstraction of flow paths in the saturated zone are 
based on boundary conditions consistent with regional models of the Death Valley groundwater 
flow system as described in Section 6.0. 
Subcriterion (10): The document has been developed under NRC (2003 [DIRS 163274]) Quality 
Assurance Requirements and Description (DOE 2004 [DIRS 171539]) that commits to using the 
guidance in NUREG-1297 (Altman et al. 1988 [DIRS 103597]) and NUREG-1298 (Altman et al. 
1988 [DIRS 103750]), which for these purposes, is incorporated in AP-SIII.9Q, Scientific 
Analyses. An Internal Data Qualification Report was produced by a Data Qualification Team in 
accordance with AP-SIII.2Q, Qualification of Unqualified Data, to qualify data from the Death 
Valley regional groundwater flow model, as described in detail in Appendix B. An Internal Data 
Qualification Report was produced by a Data Qualification Team in accordance with 
AP-SIII.2Q, Qualification of Unqualified Data, to qualify data from the 1997 unsaturated zone 
site-scale model, as described in detail in Appendix C. 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 7-3 October 2004 
Acceptance Criterion 2: Data Are Sufficient for Model Justification. 
Subcriterion (1): Hydrological values used in the license application to evaluate flow paths in the 
saturated zone are adequately justified. Section 6.0 shows how the data in the USGS reports 
were interpreted to support subsequent synthesis into parameters in other reports. 
Subcriterion (2): Sufficient data have been collected on the natural system to establish initial 
boundary conditions for the abstraction of flow paths in the SZ as described by the references in 
this report to the extensive work by the USGS to develop data for flow paths in the saturated 
zone. This report compiles that information on the recharge boundary conditions supplied to the 
saturated zone site-scale flow models listed in Section 4.0. 
Subcriterion (3): Data on the hydrology of the saturated zone are based on appropriate techniques 
because this report relies on extensive work by the USGS, as described in its reports referenced 
in this report. 
Subcriterion (4): Sufficient information is provided in Section 6 to show that proposed models 
are calibrated and applicable to site conditions. Calibration is inherent because the work relies 
on the calibration of the base-case saturated zone site-scale flow model. Section 6.2.1 shows 
how estimates of volumetric groundwater flow rates are justified by comparison with 
regional-scale flow model results. Section 6.2.2 shows how estimates of recharge from 
unsaturated zone flow model are made. Section 6.2.3 explains how recharge data from 
infiltration along Fortymile Wash is based on estimates of stream flow loses. Section 6.2.4 
shows how the combined recharge model is used to extract patterns of distributed recharges. 
Section 6.3 shows how fluxes across lateral boundaries are extracted from flow models. 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 7-4 October 2004 
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 8-1 October 2004 
8. INPUTS AND REFERENCES 
The following is a list of the references cited in this document. Column 2 represents the unique 
six digit numerical identifier (the Document Input Reference System number), which is placed in 
the text following the reference callout (e.g., BSC 2002 [DIRS 160819]). The purpose of these 
numbers is to assist in locating a specific reference. Within the reference list, multiple sources 
by the same author (e.g., BSC 2002) are sorted alphabetically by title. 
8.1 DOCUMENTS CITED 
Altman, W.D.; Donnelly, J.P.; and Kennedy, J.E. 1988. Peer Review for High-Level 
Nuclear Waste Repositories: Generic Technical Position. NUREG-1297. 
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. TIC: 200651. 
103597 
Altman, W.D.; Donnelly, J.P.; and Kennedy, J.E. 1988. Qualification of Existing 
Data for High-Level Nuclear Waste Repositories: Generic Technical Position. 
NUREG-1298. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 
TIC: 200652. 
103750 
Arnold, B.W.; Kuzio, S.P.; and Robinson, B.A. 2003. Radionuclide Transport 
Simulation and Uncertainty Analyses with the Saturated-Zone Site-Scale Model at 
Yucca Mountain, Nevada. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 62-63, 401-419. 
New York, New York: Elsevier. TIC: 254205. 
163857 
BSC (Bechtel SAIC Company) 2001. Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow 
Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and Transport Model. 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 00 ICN 01. Las Vegas, Nevada: Bechtel SAIC 
Company. ACC: MOL.20020129.0093. 
164648 
BSC (Bechtel SAIC Company) 2004. Features, Events, and Processes in SZ Flow and 
Transport. ANL-NBS-MD-000002, Rev. 03. Las Vegas, Nevada: Bechtel SAIC 
Company. TBV: 5998. 
170013 
BSC 2004. Saturated Zone In-Situ Testing. 
ANL-NBS-HS-000039, Rev. 01. Las Vegas, Nevada: Bechtel SAIC Company. 
170010 
BSC 2004. Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow Model. MDL-NBS-HS-000011, Rev. 02. 
Las Vegas, Nevada: Bechtel SAIC Company. 
170037 
BSC 2004. Technical Work Plan for: Natural System - Saturated Zone Analysis and 
Model Report Integration. TWP-NBS-MD-000002 REV 02 ICN 01. Las Vegas, 
Nevada: Bechtel SAIC Company. ACC: DOC.20040818.0004. 
171421

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 8-2 October 2004 
BSC 2004. UZ Flow Models and Submodels. MDL-NBS-HS-000006 REV 02. 
Las Vegas, Nevada: Bechtel SAIC Company. ACC: MOL.20040126.0082. 
TBV-5677 
169861 
Canori, G.F. and Leitner, M.M. 2003. Project Requirements Document. 
TER-MGRMD- 000001 REV 02. Las Vegas, Nevada: Bechtel SAIC Company. 
ACC: DOC.20031222.0006. 
166275 
CRWMS M&O (Civilian Radioactive Waste Management System Management and 
Operating Contractor) 1999. Development of Flow Boundary Conditions for SZ Flow 
and Transport Model. Work Direction and Planning Document. Las Vegas, 
Nevada: CRWMS M&O. ACC: MOL.19990707.0296. 
124552 
D'Agnese, F.A.; Faunt, C.C.; Turner, A.K.; and Hill, M.C. 1997. Hydrogeologic 
Evaluation and Numerical Simulation of the Death Valley Regional Ground-Water 
Flow System, Nevada and California. Water-Resources Investigations Report 
96-4300. Denver, Colorado: U.S. Geological Survey. ACC: MOL.19980306.0253. 
100131 
D'Agnese, F.A.; O'Brien, G.M.; Faunt, C.C.; Belcher, W.R.; and San Juan, C. 2002. 
A Three-Dimensional Numerical Model of Predevelopment Conditions in the Death 
Valley Regional Ground-Water Flow System, Nevada and California. Water- 
Resources Investigations Report 02-4102. Denver, Colorado: U.S. Geological Survey. 
TIC: 253754. 
158876 
DOE (U.S. Department of Energy) 2004. Quality Assurance Requirements and 
Description. DOE/RW-0333P, Rev. 16. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of 
Energy, Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management. 
ACC: DOC.20040907.0002. (Replacement for 171386) 
171539 
Harbaugh, A.W.; Banta, E.R.; Hill, M.C.; and McDonald, M.G. 2000. 
MODFLOW-2000, The U.S. Geological Survey Modular Ground-Water ModelUser 
Guide to Modularization Concepts and the Ground-Water Flow Process. Open-File 
Report 00-92. Reston, Virginia: U.S. Geological Survey. TIC: 250197. 
155197 
Maxey, G.B. and Eakin, T.E. 1950. Ground Water in White River Valley, White Pine, 
Nye, and Lincoln Counties, Nevada. Water Resources Bulletin No. 8. Carson City, 
Nevada: State of Nevada, Office of the State Engineer. TIC: 216819. 
100598 
NRC (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission) 2003. Yucca Mountain Review Plan, 
Final Report. NUREG-1804, Rev. 2. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards. TIC: 254568. 
163274 
Pruess, K. 1987. TOUGH Users Guide. NUREG/CR-4645. Washington, D.C.: U.S. 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission. TIC: 217275. 
100684

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 8-3 October 2004 
Pruess, K. 1991. TOUGH2A General-Purpose Numerical Simulator for Multiphase 
Fluid and Heat Flow. LBL-29400. Berkeley, California: Lawrence Berkeley 
Laboratory. ACC: NNA.19940202.0088. 
100413 
Rice, W.A., 1984. Preliminary Two-Dimensional Regional Hydrologic Model of the 
Nevada Test Site and Vicinity. SAND83-7466. Albuquerque, New Mexico: Sandia 
National Laboratories. ACC: NNA.19900810.0286. 
101284 
Savard, C.S., 1998. Estimated Ground-Water Recharge from Streamflow in Fortymile 
Wash Near Yucca Mountain, Nevada. Water-Resources Investigations Report 
97-4273. Denver, Colorado: U.S. Geological Survey. TIC: 236848. 
102213 
USGS (U.S. Geological Survey) 2003. Simulation of Net Infiltration for Modern and 
Potential Future Climates. ANL-NBS-HS-000032 REV 00 ICN 02 [Errata 002]. 
Denver, Colorado: U.S. Geological Survey. ACC: MOL.20011119.0334; 
DOC.20031014.0004; DOC.20031015.0001. 
166518 
Waddell, R.K. 1982. Two-Dimensional, Steady-State Model of Ground-Water Flow, 
Nevada Test Site and Vicinity, Nevada-California. Water-Resources Investigations 
Report 82-4085. Denver, Colorado: U.S. Geological Survey. 
ACC: NNA.19870518.0055. 
101062 
Wilson, C. 2001. Data Qualification Report: Stratigraphic Data Supporting the 
Hydrogeologic Framework Model for Use on the Yucca Mountain Project. 
TDR-NBS-HS-000013 REV 00. Las Vegas, Nevada: Bechtel SAIC Company. 
ACC: MOL.20010725.0225. 
155614 
Wu, Y.S.; Ritcey, A.C.; Ahlers, C.F.; Mishra, A.K.; Hinds, J.J.; and Bodvarsson, G.S. 
1997. Providing Base-Case Flow Fields for TSPA-VA: Evaluation of Uncertainty of 
Present-Day Infiltration Rates Using DKM/Base-Case and DKM/Weeps Parameter 
Sets. Milestone SLX01LB2. Berkeley, California: Lawrence Berkeley National 
Laboratory. ACC: MOL.19980501.0475. 
156453 
8.2 CODES, STANDARDS, REGULATIONS, AND PROCEDURES 
10 CFR 63. Energy: Disposal of High-Level Radioactive Wastes in a Geologic 
Repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. Readily available. 
156605 
AP-2.22Q, Rev. 1, ICN 1. Classification Analyses and Maintenance of the Q-List. 
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste 
Management. ACC: DOC.20040714.0002. 
AP-SIII.2Q, Rev. 1, ICN 2. Qualification of Unqualified Data. Washington, 
D.C.: U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management. 
ACC: DOC.20040127.0008. 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 8-4 October 2004 
AP-SIII.9Q, Rev. 1, ICN 7. Scientific Analyses. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department 
of Energy, Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management. 
ACC: DOC.20040920.0001. 
AP-SV.1Q, Rev. 1, ICN 1. Control of the Electronic Management of Information. 
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste 
Management. ACC: DOC.20040308.0001. 
LP-SI.11Q-BSC, Rev. 0, ICN 0. Software Management. Washington, D.C.: U.S. 
Department of Energy, Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management. 
ACC: DOC.20040225.0007. 
8.3 SOURCE DATA, LISTED BY DATA TRACKING NUMBER 
GS040308312144.001. Death Valley Regional Flow System: 2001 Steady State Model 
Data. Submittal data : 03/22/04. 
171472 
GS960808312144.003. Hydrogeologic Evaluation and Numerical Simulation of the 
Death Valley Regional Ground-Water Flow System, Nevada and California, Using 
Geoscientific Information Systems. Submittal date: 08/29/1996. 
105121 
LB03023DSSCP9I.001. 3-D Site Scale UZ Flow Field Simulations for 9 Infiltration 
Scenarios. Submittal date: 02/28/2003. 
163044 
LB971212001254.001. DKM Basecase Parameter Set for UZ Model with Mean 
Fracture Alpha, Present Day Infiltration, and Estimated Welded, Non-Welded and 
Zeolitic FMX. Submittal date: 12/12/1997. 
104749 
MO0102DQRGWREC.001. Groundwater Recharge Rate Data for the Four Reaches of 
Fortymile Wash Near Yucca Mountain, Nevada. Submittal date: 02/26/2001. 
155523 
MO0407SEPFEPLA.000. LA FEP list. Submittal date: 07/20/2004. 170760 
8.4 OUTPUT DATA, LISTED BY DATA TRACKING NUMBER 
SN9908T0581999.001. Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions 
for the Saturated Zone (SZ) Site-Scale Flow and Transport Model. Submittal 
date: 08/19/1999. 
SN0407T0504404.002. Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions 
for the Saturated Zone (SZ) Site-Scale Flow and Transport Model from the DVRFS and 
UZ Site-scale Flow Models. Submittal date: 07/15/2004. 
Files included in the DTN: SN0407T0504404.002 
boundaries.xls  contains worksheets for 1997 and 2001 DVRFS lateral flux 
boundaries (targets for FEHM) 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 8-5 October 2004 
conn_M_1997.out  contains connectivity data from the 1997 UZ site-scale flow model 
mesh 
conn_M_2003.out  contains connectivity data from the 2003 UZ site-scale flow model 
mesh 
extract_F_1997.out  contains fracture flow data from the 1997 UZ site-scale flow 
model 
extract_F_2003.out  contains fracture flow data from the 2003 UZ site-scale flow 
model 
extract_M_1997.out  contains matrix flow data from the 1997 UZ site-scale flow 
model 
extract_M_2003.out  contains matrix flow data from the 2003 UZ site-scale flow 
model 
meshgrep2_1997.out  1997 UZ area connection data 
meshgrep2_2003.out  2003 UZ area connection datarech_site_1997.dat  1997 
DVRFS water table recharge on 1,500 m grid 
read rchg from MFP.xls  spreadsheet for calculating distributed recharge to the 1997 
DVRFS 
rech_all_new.xls  spreadsheet with worksheets containing data from all recharge from 
1997 DVRFS, 1997 UZ, and Fortymile Wash 
rech_all_new_1997.prn  ASCII text file output from rech_all_new.xls (1997 
worksheet) 
rech_all_new_2003.prn  ASCII text file output from rech_all_new.xls 
2003worksheet) 
rech_distr_stream_1997.dat  distributed recharge data from the 1997 DVRFS with 
contribution from Fortymile Wash included 
rech_distr_stream_2001.dat  distributed recharge data from the 2001 DVRFS with 
contribution from Fortymile Wash included 
rech_distr_1997.dat  1997 DVRFS water table recharge on 500 m grid 
rech_distr_2001.dat  2001 DVRFS water table recharge on 500 m grid 
rech_site_1997.dat  1997 DVRFS water table recharge on 1,500 m grid 
rech_site_2001.dat  2001 DVRFS water table recharge on 1,500 m grid 
wt_flow_500_1997.dat  final FEHM input data, water table recharge  1997 models 
wt_flow_500_2003.dat  final FEHM input data, water table recharge  2001 and 2003 
models 
wt_flux_uz.xls  contains 1997 and 2003 worksheet with UZ fluxes 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 8-6 October 2004 
8.5 SOFTWARE CODES 
LANL (Los Alamos National Laboratory) 2001. CORPSCON V5.11.08. 
10547-5.11.08-00. 
155082 
LBNL (Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory) 2000. TOUGH2. V1.4. Sun 
Workstation and DEC/ALPHA. 10007-1.4-01. 
146496 
SNL (Sandia National Laboratories) 2002. EXT_RECH V 1.0. Sun - SunOS 5.7. 
10958-1.0-00. 
163072 
SNL 2002. Extract. V 1.0. Sun UltraSPARC - SunOS 5.7. 10955-1.0-00. 163070 
SNL 2002. Extract. V 1.1. Sun UltraSPARC - SunOS 5.7. 10955-1.1-00. 163071 
SNL 2002. Mult_Rech V 1.0. Sun UltraSPARC - SunOS 5.7. 10959-1.0-00. 163073 
SNL 2002. Xread_Distr_Rech.V 1.0. Sun UltraSPARC - SunOS 5.7. 10960-1.0-00. 163074 
SNL 2002. Xread_Distr_Rech.-UZ. V 1.0. Sun UltraSPARC - SunOS 5.7. 10961-1.0- 
00. 
163075 
SNL 2002. Xread_Reaches. V 1.0. Sun UltraSPARC - SunOS 5.7. 10962-1.0-00. 163076 
SNL 2002. Xwrite_Flow_New. V 1.0-125. Sun UltraSPARC - SunOS 5.7. 10963-1.0- 
125-00. 
163077 
SNL 2002. Zone. V 1.0. Sun UltraSPARC - SunOS 5.7. 10957-1.0-00. 163078 
USGS 1999. MODFLOWP. V2.3. 10144-2.3-00. 150454 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 October 2004 
APPENDIX A 
DATA TABLES 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 October 2004 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 A-1 October 2004 
The tables contained in this appendix are reproduced from DTN: SN9908T0581999.001 and 
represent the erroneous cell-by-cell flows across planes in the 1997 DVRFS corresponding to 
each of the four boundaries in the SZ site-scale flow model. They are presented to facilitate 
comparison between the incorrect data set and the new output DTN: SN0407T0504404.002. 
Table A-1. Cell-by-Cell Flow Terms (m3/day) from the 1997 DVRFS Model along the West Boundary of 
the Site-Scale Model 
Column Row Layer1 Layer2 Layer3 Sum 
62 66 3.00102 1.16102 1.73102 5.89102 
62 67 3.85102 1.29102 2.84102 7.98102 
62 68 9.13101 1.19102 1.83102 3.93102 
62 69 8.16101 5.29102 1.64102 7.74102 
62 70 1.20102 7.62102 1.18102 9.99102 
62 71 1.02102 2.26102 1.77102 5.06102 
62 72 3.59100 4.58100 4.59100 1.28101 
62 73 9.55101 1.60100 -2.02101 2.35100 
62 74 -4.32101 -7.44101 2.24101 -4.37101 
62 75 -2.30101 -5.38101 1.96100 -2.15101 
62 76 -2.66101 -5.57101 2.17100 -2.50101 
62 77 -1.33102 -6.12101 1.85100 -1.31102 
62 78 -3.07101 -1.97101 1.39100 -2.95101 
62 79 6.78101 1.51101 1.05100 6.90101 
62 80 9.91101 2.88101 9.30101 1.00102 
62 81 1.03102 2.19101 6.03101 1.03102 
62 82 1.51102 5.85101 4.22101 1.52102 
62 83 3.38101 4.75101 6.81101 3.50101 
62 84 2.35101 1.12102 8.07101 1.36102 
62 85 1.16102 1.57102 4.55101 3.18102 
62 86 5.45102 2.27102 6.57102 1.43103 
62 87 4.35102 6.45102 7.99102 1.88103 
62 88 3.89102 5.83102 3.17101 1.00103 
62 89 3.40102 4.82102 1.60101 8.38102 
62 90 6.31101 6.05102 -1.81100 6.66102 
62 91 -7.49101 7.44100 -1.93100 4.75100 
62 92 -5.17101 -1.19100 -2.17100 -5.51101 
62 93 -5.98101 -2.57100 -2.68100 -6.51101 
62 94 -8.07101 -3.55100 -3.71100 -8.80101 
62 95 -8.60101 -4.20100 -4.31100 -9.45101 
Source: DTN: SN9908T0581999.001 [DIRS 132867] in file boundaries.xls. 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 A-2 October 2004 
Table A-2. Cell-by-Cell Flow Terms (m3/day) from the 1997 DVRFS Model along the East Boundary of 
the Site-Scale Model 
Column Row Layer1 Layer2 Layer3 Sum 
82 66 3.51101 1.04102 1.03100 1.40102 
82 67 3.25101 5.95101 2.87100 9.49101 
82 68 1.03101 1.79101 1.85100 3.01101 
82 69 -3.49100 -6.73100 1.90103 -1.02101 
82 70 -2.13101 -3.07101 1.63102 -5.19101 
82 71 -3.12101 -4.06101 2.09102 -7.18101 
82 72 -9.51101 -1.51102 8.80103 -9.51101 
82 73 9.57102 2.22101 1.12101 2.24101 
82 74 -2.53102 -4.91100 3.11101 -4.63100 
82 75 5.17100 3.82101 3.19101 4.36101 
82 76 5.32100 3.25101 1.42101 5.21101 
82 77 2.31101 2.99101 3.69101 8.99101 
82 78 2.12101 1.98101 1.42101 5.52101 
82 79 5.62100 1.58101 4.42100 2.58101 
82 80 1.43100 1.89100 -6.96101 2.62100 
82 81 4.41100 1.34100 -4.22102 5.71100 
82 82 1.43101 3.25100 4.38102 1.76101 
82 83 1.34101 3.52100 -7.69101 1.61101 
82 84 7.09100 2.99100 -1.49100 8.59100 
82 85 6.22100 5.05100 1.85101 1.14101 
82 86 2.93101 5.40100 3.13101 6.61101 
82 87 1.97100 1.62101 4.11101 5.93101 
82 88 2.85101 1.55103 3.12103 4.67103 
82 89 3.89101 2.09103 4.15103 6.24103 
82 90 4.16101 2.23103 4.42103 6.65103 
82 91 4.11101 2.20103 4.39103 6.59103 
82 92 3.20100 2.14103 4.30103 6.45103 
82 93 5.17100 2.06103 4.21103 6.27103 
82 94 1.45101 1.85103 3.99103 5.86103 
82 95 1.38101 1.56103 3.69103 5.26103 
Source: DTN: SN9908T0581999.001 [DIRS 132867] in file boundaries.xls. 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 A-3 October 2004 
Table A-3. Cell-by-Cell Flow Terms (m3/day) from the 1997 DVRFS Model along the North Boundary of 
the Site-Scale Model 
Column Row Layer1 Layer2 Layer3 Sum 
63 65 4.37102 1.59102 8.89101 6.84102 
64 65 4.45102 6.66102 1.27102 1.24103 
65 65 4.70102 7.05102 1.42102 1.32103 
66 65 4.97102 7.43102 1.46102 1.39103 
67 65 5.11102 7.67102 1.41102 1.42103 
68 65 5.13102 7.71102 1.31102 1.42103 
69 65 5.00102 7.03102 1.17102 1.32103 
70 65 9.00101 1.24102 9.94101 3.14102 
71 65 9.43101 1.36102 7.92101 3.09102 
72 65 8.19101 1.26102 5.47101 2.63102 
73 65 7.92101 1.22102 4.55101 2.47102 
74 65 8.18101 1.24102 2.46100 2.08102 
75 65 7.81101 2.08102 3.32100 2.89102 
76 65 7.14101 8.35102 2.45101 9.31102 
77 65 7.71101 9.12102 2.49101 1.01103 
78 65 8.48101 9.90102 2.64101 1.10103 
79 65 1.61102 1.06103 2.73101 1.25103 
80 65 1.67102 1.10103 2.75101 1.30103 
81 65 2.05102 3.22102 3.82101 5.65102 
82 65 8.24101 2.26102 4.55101 3.54102 
Source: DTN: SN9908T0581999.001 [DIRS 132867] in file 
boundaries.xls. 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 A-4 October 2004 
Table A-4. Cell-by-Cell flow Terms (m3/day) from the 1997 DVRFS Model along the South Boundary of 
the Site-Scale Model 
Column Row Layer1 Layer2 Layer3 Sum 
63 95 -1.02101 -2.70101 -2.39100 -3.96101 
64 95 -1.62102 -6.53101 -3.15100 -2.31102 
65 95 -8.26101 -7.57102 -1.66102 -1.01103 
66 95 -3.59102 -6.01102 -1.93102 -1.15103 
67 95 -3.71102 -6.12102 -2.43102 -1.23103 
68 95 -5.12102 -7.55102 -2.49102 -1.52103 
69 95 -5.56102 -8.30102 -1.31103 -2.70103 
70 95 -5.92102 -8.86102 -1.35103 -2.82103 
71 95 -6.10102 -9.14102 -1.43103 -2.96103 
72 95 -5.58102 -8.54102 -1.37103 -2.78103 
73 95 -4.87102 -7.49102 -1.28103 -2.52103 
74 95 -2.97102 -4.63102 -1.19103 -1.95103 
75 95 -1.34102 -4.55101 -1.07103 -1.25103 
76 95 -7.59101 -3.54101 -5.42101 -1.66102 
77 95 -1.03100 1.62101 2.18101 3.70101 
78 95 -1.02101 -9.78101 -1.52102 -2.60102 
79 95 -6.43100 -3.47103 -7.41103 -1.09104 
80 95 -5.33100 -3.42103 -7.54103 -1.10104 
81 95 -3.20101 -3.66103 -7.83103 -1.15104 
82 95 -3.58101 -4.12103 -8.15103 -1.23104 
Source: DTN: SN9908T0581999.001 [DIRS 132867] in file boundaries.xls. 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 October 2004 
APPENDIX B 
ONE-TIME USE OF QUALIFICATION OF DTN: GS960808312144.003 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 October 2004 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 B-1 October 2004 
B1. INTRODUCTION 
This Internal Data Qualification Report uses technical assessment methods to evaluate the 
appropriateness of unqualified data from the Death Valley regional groundwater flow model 
(DAgnese et al. 1997 [DIRS 100131]) for use in report S0010, Recharge and Lateral 
Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and Transport 
Model, Revision 01. This qualification report was prepared as an attachment to this report in 
conformance with AP-SIII.2Q, Qualification of Unqualified Data. The Death Valley regional 
groundwater flow model was prepared by the U.S. Geological Survey and has been published by 
the U.S. Geological Survey as a Water Resources Investigations Report. Inputs to the regional 
model were used to identify groundwater recharge across the upper surface of the Yucca 
Mountain Site Projects saturated zone site-scale flow and transport model, and outputs from the 
regional model were used to identify groundwater flow across the lateral boundaries of the 
site-scale model. Specifically, the data to be qualified are found in DTN: GS960808312144.003 
[DIRS 105121], which contains the input and output files from the work of DAgnese et al. 
(1997 [DIRS 100131]). 
The Data Qualification Team found the Death Valley regional flow model database to be well 
researched, the model to be appropriately constructed, and the resulting output to provide a 
reasonable simulation of regional groundwater flow. Several approaches to estimating recharge 
from precipitation were evaluated by the regional models authors before deciding on a 
modification of an empirical relationship developed by Maxey and Eakin (1950 [DIRS 100598]). 
Shortcomings of other, more recent techniques were identified, particularly for application to 
desert areas where small amounts of recharge were ignored. Within the area of the saturated 
zone site-scale model, the recharge fluxes from the regional model are consistent with similar 
magnitude fluxes independently estimated from the unsaturated zone flow model and from 
focused recharge from Fortymile Wash. The Maxey-Eakin method is widely used and accepted 
by the technical community and is appropriate for use in the regional model. 
The effective residual between actual and simulated heads was determined to be 45 m for most 
wells in the regional model. The Data Qualification Team considers this overall goodness-of-fit 
to be moderate, but acceptable. Because the goodness-of-fit is a measure of the models 
accuracy, a degree of uncertainty must be associated with the regional model outputs used to 
identify lateral flux boundary conditions for the site-scale model. These uncertainties were 
adequately addressed by using the regional model fluxes, not as absolute values, but as target 
boundary conditions during site-scale model calibration. Specifying the fluxes absolutely would 
also over-constrain the site-scale model and interfere with its calibration. 
The Data Qualification Team has concluded that the Death Valley regional flow model provides 
a qualified source of data for establishing recharge and lateral flux boundary conditions for the 
base-case SZ site-scale flow and transport model. In accordance with AP-SIII.2Q, this finding 
qualifies these data only for their intended uses in this report. The regional models source 
DTN: GS960808312144.003 [DIRS 105121] will remain unqualified for other uses. 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 B-2 October 2004 
B1.1 PURPOSE 
This Internal Data Qualification Report evaluates the appropriateness of unqualified data from 
the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) flow model of the Death Valley regional groundwater 
system for use in this report, Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for 
the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and Transport Model, Revision 01. This qualification report 
was prepared as an appendix to this report. 
The regional model was developed in part to support site-scale modeling for the YMP. Inputs to 
the regional model were used in this report to identify groundwater recharge across the upper 
surface of the site-scale model and outputs from the regional model were used to identify 
groundwater flow targets across the lateral boundaries of the site-scale model. This evaluation 
was performed in accordance with the internal data qualification requirements of AP-SIII.2Q, 
Qualification of Unqualified Data. A finding that the regional model is internally qualified 
means that it is qualified to support the license application, but only for the uses made in 
Scientific Analysis Report S0010. The appropriateness and limitations of the data with respect 
to intended use are addressed in this appendix. 
B1.2 SCOPE 
This appendix was prepared according to the guidelines in AP-SIII.2Q. The Internal Data 
Qualification Plan identifies one data tracking number (DTN) containing unqualified, developed 
hydrogeological data associated with the Death Valley regional flow model. These data were 
collected by the USGS and are cited in a USGS Water Resources Investigations Report (WRIR) 
by DAgnese et al. (1997 [DIRS 100131]). The data evaluated in the plan are presented in the 
DTN: GS960808312144.003 [DIRS 105121] titled Hydrogeologic Evaluation and Numerical 
Simulation of the Death Valley Regional Ground-Water Flow System, Nevada and California, 
Using Geoscientific Information Systems. 
The foregoing DTN is unqualified because it summarizes a study performed for the YMP and 
contains data collected by nonYMP personnel. In addition to the recharge and lateral flow data 
used in this report, the data set contains other information that was not directly used in that 
Scientific Analysis Report and is not within the scope of this qualification activity. This 
qualification report focuses on the specific data selected to support the SZ site-scale groundwater 
flow model in this report. To the extent that only subsets of data within this DTN were used in 
the this report (e.g., cell-by-cell fluxes were extracted from the 1997 DVRFS model at positions 
corresponding to the boundaries of the SZ site-scale flow model), only those data are evaluated 
for qualification. 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 B-3 October 2004 
B1.3 DATA QUALIFICATION TEAM 
Chairperson: The Chairperson for this internal data qualification, Scott C. James, is the 
originator of this report. 
Team Member: The team member for this internal data qualification is Thomas S. Lowry. 
B1.4 BACKGROUND 
The data from DTN: GS960808312144.003 [DIRS 105121] that were used in this report are 
presented in USGS WRIR 96-4300, Hydrogeologic Evaluation and Numerical Simulation of the 
Death Valley Regional Ground-Water Flow System, Nevada and California (DAgnese et al. 
1997 [DIRS 100131]). Although that report is unqualified, the model construction and review 
were performed in accordance with YMP quality assurance procedures, the model was 
developed and reviewed in accordance with USGS policy, and the model results were formally 
published in a WRIR after receiving the USGS Directors approval (DAgnese et al. 1997 
[DIRS 100131], p. 4). 
The domain of the YMP SZ site-scale flow and transport model lies entirely within the larger 
domain of the Death Valley regional flow model. Three sources of information were used in this 
report to develop estimates of groundwater recharge across the upper surface of the base-case SZ 
site-scale model: distributed recharge as used in the 1997 DVRFS, flux at the bottom boundary 
of the 1997 UZ site-scale flow model, and data from infiltration through Fortymile Wash 
(CRWMS M&O 1999 [DIRS 124552], p. 6). The first of these was the regional models input 
database, which contains estimates of recharge across the entire Death Valley region including 
the area of the base-case SZ site-scale flow model. The second information source for recharge 
was the flux across the lower, water table boundary, of the 1997 UZ site-scale flow model. The 
domain of the UZ site-scale model lies entirely within the larger domain of the base-case SZ 
site-scale flow model. Within the UZ site-scale flow model domain, recharge from the UZ 
models replaces recharge from the DVRFS models. The third information source is a USGS 
WRIR that provides an estimate of focused recharge along Fortymile Wash (Savard 1998 
[DIRS 102213]). Within the area of Fortymile Wash, recharge to the SZ site-scale model is 
equal to the estimated recharge from flow in the wash. Only the first of these data sources, the 
1997 DVRFS model, is addressed in this appendix. Outflow from the UZ model is technical 
product output, and the estimates of recharge from Fortymile Wash have been separately 
qualified (Wilson 2001 [DIRS 155614]). 
Output from the regional model was used in this report to develop estimates of groundwater flow 
across the lateral boundaries of the base-case SZ site-scale flow model. This report uses a nested 
model approach, where uncertainties in boundary conditions for the smaller model are reduced 
by developing them from internal flow patterns calculated within a larger model. The increased 
precision and accuracy required in a site-specific study, such as at Yucca Mountain, requires fine 
grid resolution, which can be computationally expensive. To increase computational efficiency, 
the site model is reduced in size (area of model footprint) with the consequence that the model 
boundaries are often not optimally located where groundwater flow conditions are well 
understood. Thus, it is common to develop the boundary conditions from a larger, lower 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 B-4 October 2004 
resolution model that has boundaries that are more optimally located, for example, at 
groundwater divides. This is the process followed in this report by using the regional model to 
develop boundary conditions for the SZ site-scale model. 
B2. QUALIFICATION APPROACH 
B2.1 QUALIFICATION METHODS 
The regional model is unqualified because its input data are unqualified. The regional 
hydrologic and geologic data required for the model were collected outside the YMP because no 
other data were available (DAgnese et al. 1997 [DIRS 100131], p. 4). However, model 
construction and review were performed in accordance with accepted YMP quality assurance 
procedures and USGS policy (DAgnese et al. 1997 [DIRS 100131], p. 4). In view of these 
conditions and the unique status of the model in depicting regional groundwater flow, the data 
were evaluated for their intended use in this report by method number 5 of AP-SIII.2Q, 
Attachment 3, Technical Assessment. 
The Data Qualification Team evaluated the appropriateness and accuracy of the methods used by 
the USGS to develop the regional model inputs and outputs used in this report. Technical 
assessments focused on the methodology used to prepare the model inputs and perform the 
modeling. The assessments also considered the appropriateness of the model results for the 
applied uses in this report and the accuracy requirements associated with those uses. Because the 
modeling was performed on a regional basis in an area with unevenly distributed data and 
complex hydrogeology, the modeling results are necessarily approximate. Such results can be 
appropriately used so long as consideration is given to limitations on their accuracy, precision, 
and applicability for an intended use. 
B2.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA 
Evaluation Criteria: The unqualified data were evaluated for use in thie report based on 
consideration of the following evaluation criteria. These criteria were selected to incorporate the 
considerations in AP-SIII.2Q, Attachment 3, Considerations for Determining Qualification 
Methods, and AP-SIII.2Q, Attachment 4, Qualification Process Attributes. 
1. Are the methods used to develop the Death Valley regional groundwater model 
reasonable and generally accepted by the technical community? 
2. Are the methods used in this report to develop boundary conditions from the 
regional modeling results reasonable and generally accepted by the technical 
community? 
3. Are there more appropriate sources of information for developing the boundary 
conditions required in this report? 
4. Are the boundary condition data and their associated uncertainties acceptable for 
their intended use? 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 B-5 October 2004 
Recommendation Criteria: A recommendation for internal qualification is based on the 
satisfactory resolution of the evaluation criteria. Although these criteria are considered in 
determining whether the data are appropriate for their intended use in this report, the conclusions 
of the Data Qualification Team are based on expert judgment, and not all of the evaluation 
criteria may be applied. 
B3. EVALUATION RESULTS 
A technical assessment of the Death Valley regional flow model (DAgnese et al. 1997 
[DIRS 100131]) was performed by evaluating the approach used to develop the model's input 
database, the code selection and model development processes, and the assessment of the model 
output. Each of these elements of the review is discussed in the following sections of this 
appendix. 
B3.1 INPUT DATABASE 
The methods used to compile the regional models input database were reviewed with special 
emphasis on the recharge data that were directly used in this report. The model was constructed 
using methods that have been widely accepted within the technical community. The model was 
based primarily on existing data, accompanied by extensive analysis and synthesis. In compiling 
the input database, heavy reliance was placed on the USGS National Water Information System 
database and on formal USGS publications, such as Professional Papers, Water Resources 
Investigations Reports, and Water Supply Papers. These are considered established fact by the 
YMP. New methods of storage, retrieval, and analysis of the complex input database were used 
that take advantage of recent advances in the technology of Geoscientific Information Systems 
(GSIS). Emphasis on the input database focused on identifying regional discharge, recharge, and 
interbasin flows, the regional hydrogeologic framework, and the regional patterns of 
groundwater movement. 
B3.1.1 Discharge Component 
The discharge component of groundwater movement within the region was quantified by 
measuring spring flows, estimating evapotranspiration by phreatophytes and wet playas, and 
estimating groundwater pumping (DAgnese et al. 1997 [DIRS 100131], p. 43). Trained USGS 
professional geologists performed all studies and collected all data in accord with standard 
USGS procedures of the time. These methods and procedures are standard to the industry and 
provide acceptable resolution and accuracy for their use in this report. The greatest discharges 
were found to be evaporation from wet playas and evapotranspiration by plants. Detailed maps 
of the distributions of specific phreatophytes were developed for this study that included all areas 
in the region where significant groundwater discharges may occur from vegetation or moist, bare 
soil. Springs that discharge from the regional groundwater flow system were included in this 
study (DAgnese et al. 1997 [DIRS 100131], p. 44). These springs typically emerge from the 
valley fill and carbonate aquifer at low elevations along the borders or on the floor of some 
valleys. Groundwater pumping was estimated based on average annual consumptive use for the 
various commercial, irrigation, mining, and domestic applications in the region. Although these 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 B-6 October 2004 
average rates were based on different time periods, they were believed to offer the best available 
estimate of pumping rates (DAgnese et al. 1997 [DIRS 100131], p. 47). 
B3.1.2 Recharge Component 
The recharge component of groundwater movement was quantified from precipitation data and 
estimates of interbasin flows at the model boundaries. Because of the uncertainty in some 
significant elements of the water balance, such as evapotranspiration rates and interbasin flows, 
the smaller contributions of surface water runoff and irrigation return flows were ignored in the 
study. Several approaches to estimating recharge from precipitation were evaluated by 
DAgnese et al. (1997 [DIRS 100131]) before deciding on a modification of the empirical 
relationship developed by Maxey and Eakin (1950 [DIRS 100598]). The modification to the 
Maxey-Eakin method is based on a straightforward scaling of the original result by constants 
defined by the local zones of altitude, slope, permeability, and vegetation. Shortcomings of 
other, more recent techniques were discussed, particularly for application to desert areas where 
small amounts of recharge, such as the amount that probably occurs at Yucca Mountain, were 
ignored (DAgnese et al. 1997 [DIRS 100131], p. 51). Although acknowledged to provide an 
empirical relationship, the Maxey-Eakin method is widely used and accepted by the technical 
community and was also used in preparing report U0010, Simulation of Net Infiltration for 
Modern and Potential Future Climates (USGS 2001 [DIRS 166518]). 
The basic premise of the Maxey-Eakin recharge estimate is that groundwater recharge is 
proportional to annual precipitation. The method is best suited for arid environments, where 
high elevations typically experience much greater annual rainfall than low elevations. Recharge 
estimates using the Maxey-Eakin method require predicting how precipitation (rain and snow) 
varies with elevation change on an annual basis in localized areas. In the work of DAgnese 
et al. (1997 [DIRS 100131]), the Maxey-Eakin method was made more sensitive to the four 
critical potential recharge indicators within the region: altitude, slope-aspect, relative rock and 
soil permeability, and vegetation (DAgnese et al. 1997 [DIRS 100131], p. 52). Regional maps 
were prepared for each of these indicators and the recharge potential for each area was classified 
on a six-point scale. The four maps were then overlaid to produce a single map that combined 
the recharge ratings and a final recharge database, reclassified into six zones, was prepared. As 
with the Maxey-Eakin method, these recharge potential classes were assigned distinctive 
percentages of mean annual precipitation that are expected to contribute to recharge. Within the 
study area, these percentages ranged from zero in areas of no (or very low) recharge potential to 
30 percent in areas of highest potential. 
The accuracy and suitability of the refined Maxey-Eakin method were evaluated by DAgnese 
et al. (1997 [DIRS 100131], p. 55). The locations of low-temperature springs (indicative of 
shallow groundwater flow) were assumed to indicate greater uphill recharge potentials. Areas 
uphill from low temperature springs, regardless of altitude, were found to coincide with 
predicted regional recharge areas. Also, because of the vegetation constraints imposed, all 
predicted recharge areas were restricted to zones classified as coniferous forests, pion-juniper 
woodlands, or mixed transition shrublands. The suitability of the method was also evaluated by 
comparing total recharge volumes in individual hydrographic basins with those estimated in 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 B-7 October 2004 
previous investigations. Generally, higher rates were estimated for the regional model in higher 
elevation basins and generally lower rates were estimated in the central and southern parts of the 
region. This is illustrated in Figures 6-1 and 6-2 of Scientific Analysis Report S00010. Overall, 
the DAgnese et al. (1997 [DIRS 100131], p. 55) estimates were 30 percent higher than if the 
unmodified Maxey-Eakin method had been used. Reasons forwarded for this difference include 
a slightly higher estimated average annual rainfall, greater recharge potential in high elevation 
areas than previously estimated, and a reduced accuracy of the Maxey-Eakin method outside the 
area of the northern Great Basin where the empirical relationships were developed (DAgnese 
et al. 1997 [DIRS 100131], p. 55). In terms of model impact, the increased recharge estimate is 
conservative in that increasing recharge in high elevation areas translates into a higher flux of 
groundwater. DAgnese et al. (1997 [DIRS 100131], p. 55) conclude that while the prepared 
maps may not exactly describe recharge locations on a local scale, they appear to be appropriate 
for delineating large-scale zones of recharge. They note, however, that even with the better 
defined potential recharge areas, the rates are still based on an empirical relationship rather than 
actual measurements and reflect a significant unknown flux in the regional modeling (DAgnese 
et al. 1997 [DIRS 100131], p. 55). 
The recharge fluxes from the regional model are consistent with similar magnitude fluxes 
independently estimated from the UZ site-scale flow model and from the focused recharge from 
Fortymile Wash. The correlation between topography and recharge is similar in the regional and 
the UZ models, both of which show decreasing recharge with decreasing elevations to the south. 
The magnitudes of recharge are also similar, ranging from near zero to 8 or 9 mm/year. In 
addition, the more refined UZ site-scale flow model and Fortymile Wash analysis supplement the 
coarser, regional-scale analysis. The regional model focus is on broad topographical and vegetal 
considerations. It does not account for the refined topography of Yucca Mountain captured in 
the UZ site-scale flow model, nor does it specifically account for localized recharge from runoff 
in Fortymile Wash. Although residual uncertainties affect the recharge data, the total recharge 
mass fluxes of about 18.9 kg/s into the base-case SZ flow model from the 1997 DVRFS is small 
compared to the total lateral mass influx of about 863.2 kg/s calculated for the lateral boundaries 
of the model. Residual uncertainties in the recharge will therefore have relatively little impact on 
the overall modeling results. However, it is noted that beneath the repository site, where vertical 
seepage may be an important transport mechanism for migrating radionuclides, the recharge is 
comprehensively defined and integrated into the upper boundary of the base-case SZ site-scale 
flow and transport model. 
Most lateral boundaries of the regional model were located where no groundwater flow occurs. 
Most of these boundaries result from the presence of low-permeability bedrock. Interbasin flows 
occur where the permeability of the bedrock is high enough to allow significant groundwater 
flow and where a hydraulic gradient exists across the boundary. Significant inflows may occur 
into the modeled region at ten different locations, most of which have little of the data needed to 
estimate flow rates (DAgnese et al. 1997 [DIRS 100131], p. 59). No significant discharge from 
the region is thought to occur through interbasin flow. Although flows were estimated for each 
of these areas based on available information and the uncertainties in these estimates are high 
(DAgnese et al. 1997 [DIRS 100131], p. 71), the flows from these sources are believed to be 
small compared to infiltration from precipitation. That is, the high uncertainty in the small 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 B-8 October 2004 
boundary fluxes are insufficient to impact the overall model performance because the effects of 
infiltration (and uncertainties in infiltration) are so much greater. 
B3.1.3 Regional Hydrogeologic Framework 
The regional hydrogeologic framework accounts for the influences of stratigraphy and geologic 
structure on groundwater movement, the hydrologic properties of the hydrogeologic units, and 
the regional potentiometric surface. The framework is a geometrical configuration of the 
regional hydrogeologic structure designed to support the regional model. A regional digital 
elevation model was combined with geologic maps to provide a three-dimensional series of 
points locating the outcrops of individual geologic formations, geologic cross sections, and 
borehole lithologic logs. The surface and subsurface data were then interpolated to define the 
tops of hydrogeologic units (DAgnese et al. 1997 [DIRS 100131], p. 33). Minor faults and 
other structures that were not considered to influence regional hydrology were not generally 
included in the model. 
The distribution of hydraulic conductivity values was defined as part of the hydrogeologic 
framework. The conductivities initially assigned to each model cell were varied by rock type, 
depth, degree of faulting, degree of weathering, grain size, and degree of welding, as appropriate 
to the rock type (DAgnese et al. 1997 [DIRS 100131], p. 42). 
A new potentiometric surface was constructed for this study using regional water level data from 
wells, boundaries of perennial marshes and ponds, topographic elevations, regional spring 
locations, the locations of recharge and discharge areas, and hydrogeologic information 
(DAgnese et al. 1997 [DIRS 100131], p. 56). In this sparsely populated area, well data are 
concentrated in alluvial valleys and data are generally lacking in consolidated bedrock. 
Supplemental information was developed from other sources such as the elevations of perennial 
marshes and ponds, and the elevations of regional springs and playa discharge areas. Manual 
adjustments to the potentiometric surface were made to reflect the steeper hydraulic gradients in 
lower permeability rocks and the development of groundwater highs in regional recharge areas. 
GSIS methods were used to represent the considerable array of three-dimensional data used in 
constructing the regional model. The GSIS is a three-dimensional extension of the traditional 
two-dimensional Geographic Information System (GIS), and its development and application to 
the Death Valley regional modeling is extensively described by DAgnese et al. (1997 
[DIRS 100131], pp. 22 to 33). 
B3.1.4 Regional Groundwater Movement 
For purposes of discussing groundwater movement, the regional system was divided into three 
subregional flow systems. Conceptual descriptions of groundwater movement in each of these 
systems are presented by DAgnese et al. (1997 [DIRS 100131], p. 62) and are used to help 
evaluate the modeling results. Compilations of inflows and outflows from these subregions were 
used by DAgnese et al. (1997 [DIRS 100131], p. 71) to prepare an estimated water budget for 
the region. The Data Qualification Team concurs with DAgnese et al. (1997 
[DIRS 100131], p. 71) that because of the uncertainties involved, water budgets generally 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 B-9 October 2004 
provide only gross indications of the accuracy of the major flow components. Based only on the 
aforementioned estimates of inflows and outflows and not on modeling results, regional outflows 
(374,000 m3/day) were found to exceed regional inflows (344,200 m3/day) by 29,800 m3/day 
(DAgnese et al. 1997 [DIRS 100131], Table 13). Not included in the water budget is an 
estimated 89,400 m3/day groundwater pumping which is represented as a change in storage. 
However, because the regional model is steady-state, changes in storage cannot be 
accommodated because they represent nonequilibrium conditions (DAgnese et al. 1997 
[DIRS 100131], p. 72). The pumping was treated as a groundwater discharge in the final model. 
B3.1.5 Discussion 
The Data Qualification Team found that the regional models input database was diligently 
compiled using appropriate methodologies that take into account the difficulties of handling 
large amounts of data for a large and complex region, as well as the uncertainties that are present 
in much of the developed information. Data collection methods were based on standard 
scientific work practices using USGS procedures. The care taken in developing the regional 
hydrogeologic framework was appreciated, as was the use of the new GSIS techniques for 
managing the data. 
Discharges from evapotranspiration, playa evaporation, spring flow, and pumping were well 
researched, particularly the evapotranspiration component which constituted the largest single 
source of discharge. Recharge was dominated by infiltration of precipitation, which remained 
somewhat uncertain despite the large effort put into its quantification. The effort expended by 
DAgnese et al. (1997 [DIRS 100131]) to corroborate the various model inputs lent credibility to 
their results. Given that the average estimated regional recharge from infiltration of 
312,300 m3/day (DAgnese et al. 1997 [DIRS 100131], Table 13) amounts to over 90 percent of 
the total regional inflow, it is not surprising that the model should be quite sensitive to this 
parameter (DAgnese et al. 1997 [DIRS 100131], Figure 43). DAgnese et al. (1997 
[DIRS 100131], p. 55) make the statement that the recharge rates are still based on empirical 
estimates rather than actual measured rates and reflect a significant unknown flux in modeling 
this region. The Data Qualification Team believes that this statement is overly cautious. While 
the uncertainty associated with this parameter is certainly high, its value is based on reasonable 
science and is far from being unknown. Although a high degree of uncertainty is also associated 
with interbasin flow at the model boundaries, the volumes involved are estimated to be small and 
the modeling results are not expected to be sensitive to this parameter. 
The Data Qualification Team shares DAgnese et al.s (1997 [DIRS 100131], p. 72) concern 
about the inability of a steady state model to adequately incorporate changes in the volume of 
groundwater in storage from pumping. By incorporating such withdrawals as discharges in a 
steady state model, other discharges are proportionately reduced so that a balance between 
recharge and discharge is maintained. While this may, in part, explain the models tendency to 
underestimate discharges from the larger springs, inclusion of pumping as a constant discharge in 
the model will tend to make it more representative of long term, developed conditions that are of 
primary interest to performance assessment at Yucca Mountain. 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 B-10 October 2004 
B3.2 CODE SELECTION AND MODEL DEVELOPMENT 
The MODFLOWP code was used for the Death Valley regional flow study. This code has been 
added to the YMP software baseline and can be used in qualified calculations. MODFLOWP is 
an adaptation of the USGS MODFLOW code that allows nonlinear regression to be used in the 
calibration process (DAgnese et al. 1997 [DIRS 100131], p. 72). Although more refined interim 
databases were developed, the final model was constructed with three hydrogeologic unit layers 
(DAgnese et al. 1997 [DIRS 100131], p. 75) and a 1,500-m grid spacing (DAgnese et al. 1997 
[DIRS 100131], p. 37). DAgnese et al. (1997 [DIRS 100131], p. 37) found this configuration to 
be sufficiently detailed to support the regional modeling effort and allowed the entire area to be 
displayed as a single model using available computers. The first two model layers simulate local 
and subregional flow mostly within valley-fill alluvium, volcanic rocks, and shallow carbonate 
rocks. The third layer simulates regional flow in volcanic, carbonate, and clastic rocks 
(DAgnese et al. 1997 [DIRS 100131], p. 75). Each model layer contains several hydrogeologic 
framework model units (DAgnese et al. 1997 [DIRS 100131], p. 77). The bottom of the model 
is located 2,750 m below the interpreted water table (DAgnese et al. 1997 
[DIRS 100131], p. 75). 
The mapped input databases were resampled to a 1,500-m lateral grid spacing and reclassified to 
simplify the final model. For example, simplification of the hydraulic conductivity database in 
the final model resulted in the definition of four hydraulic conductivity zones representing very 
small to large conductivity values. The 50th percentile conductivity values were used as initial 
estimates in the model (DAgnese et al. 1997 [DIRS 100131], p. 77). This simplified the number 
of parameters that were varied in the calibration process. The model was calibrated by varying 
the locations and types of boundary conditions, recharge parameters, and the interpretation of the 
hydrogeologic framework until acceptable matches were made with measured hydraulic heads 
and spring flows. Nonlinear regression methods were used to estimate parameter values that 
produced the best fit to observed heads and flows (DAgnese et al. 1997 [DIRS 100131], p. 72). 
Hydraulic conductivities, vertical anisotropy ratios, recharge potentials, spring conductance, and 
groundwater pumping were varied during the calibration process (DAgnese et al. 1997 
[DIRS 100131], p. 84). No modifications were made to conceptual models during calibration 
simply to improve the model fit (DAgnese et al. 1997 [DIRS 100131], p. 86) and the parameter 
values estimated by the regression process remained reasonable. Supporting independent 
hydrogeologic criteria were needed before modifications were made (DAgnese et al. 1997 
[DIRS 100131], p. 86). Detailed analysis of the calibration results identified previously 
overlooked spurious data, such as head observations from perched zones, incorrectly recorded 
head data, springs that issued from local instead of regional groundwater, and incorrect spring 
altitudes. 
The Data Qualification Team considers use of the MODFLOWP code in constructing the model 
to be appropriate. MODFLOW has become the industry standard with regards to simulating 
saturated zone groundwater flow and the advantages of the MODFLOWP adaptation in 
simplifying the calibration process and evaluating the model results are clearly explained by 
DAgnese et al. (1997 [DIRS 100131], p. 95). It is always regretful when a detailed model 
database has to be simplified to accommodate operational constraints, but the reasons for such 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 B-11 October 2004 
simplification are understood. Overall, DAgnese et al. (1997 [DIRS 100131]) do not modify the 
model without supporting hydrogeologic criteria and they maintaining the hydraulic parameter 
values within reasonable bounds. 
B3.3 MODEL OUTPUT 
The regional flow model was validated by comparing model outputs with the regional 
potentiometric surface, hydraulic head measurements in individual wells, hydraulic gradients, 
and spring discharges (DAgnese et al. 1997 [DIRS 100131], p. 94). DAgnese et al. (1997 
[DIRS 100131], p. 104) conclude that a general comparison of the simulated hydraulic heads 
with the regional potentiometric surface map indicates that the regional model depicts major 
features of the head distribution well (thus there is corroboration). Although this conclusion was 
confirmed by a comparison of the estimated potentiometric surface by DAgnese et al. (1997 
[DIRS 100131], Figure 27) with the simulated surfaces shown in the same work (DAgnese et al. 
1997 [DIRS 100131], Figures 48 to 53), the simulated surfaces are considerably smoother and do 
not exhibit the variability of the estimated surface. 
In areas of flatter hydraulic gradients, simulated heads were within 75 m of observed well levels 
everywhere in the model and generally within 50 m. Based on the standard error of the 
regression of simulated and observed heads, the effective model fit for most wells is 45 m 
(DAgnese et al. 1997 [DIRS 100131], p. 94). In areas of steep gradients, the differences 
between simulated and measured heads are as large as 300 m. DAgnese et al. (1997 
[DIRS 100131], p. 94) consider this match to be good in view of the 2,000-m head drop across 
the system. DAgnese et al. (1997 [DIRS 100131], p. 104) consider good fits to have residuals 
of less than 20 m (1 percent of the total head drop), moderate fits to have residuals of 20 to 60 m, 
and poor fits to have residuals greater than 60 m. By this definition, the overall goodness-of-fit 
would be considered moderate. Matching spring flows was found to be difficult and the 
measured values were generally underestimated. The sum of all simulated spring flows is 
51,700 m3/day, whereas the sum of all observed spring flows is 120,000 m3/day (DAgnese et al. 
1997 [DIRS 100131], p. 94). These comparisons can be misleading, however, because not all 
observations have been measured with the same accuracy. Nevertheless, even with 
acknowledged errors in the model output, they are still acceptable for their intended use as input 
to the base-case SZ site-scale flow model because they are small enough to not significantly 
impact model calibration. The fitting techniques of DAgnese et al. (1997 [DIRS 100131]) were 
considered state-of-the-art at the time of the publication of his report. 
DAgnese et al. (1997 [DIRS 100131], p. 104) note that an indication of nonrandom distribution 
of head residuals in the model subregions suggests that the model may be in error. However, 
across the entire model the residuals do generally vary randomly about zero (DAgnese et al. 
1997 [DIRS 100131], Figure 56). The overall water budget for the model is good, with inflows 
balancing outflows within 2,000 m3/day (DAgnese et al. 1997 [DIRS 100131], Table 17). In 
this water budget calculation, pumping is included among the regional discharges. 
The Data Qualification Team concurs with DAgnese et al.s (1997 [DIRS 100131], p. 104) 
definitions of goodness-of-fit and concludes that this model provides a moderately accurate 
simulation of the DVRFS. Considering the large size of the region, the hydrogeologic 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 B-12 October 2004 
complexity, and the sparse data, achieving any better overall validation accuracy would have 
been surprising. The team found that the Death Valley regional flow model database was well 
researched, the model was appropriately constructed, and the resulting output provides a 
reasonable simulation of regional groundwater flow despite the possibility of model error 
indicated by the authors (DAgnese et al. 1997 [DIRS 100131], p. 112). 
The residual uncertainty in the model simulations is well described by its authors (DAgnese 
et al. 1997 [DIRS 100131], pp. 95 to 112). Uncertainties in the model output are of potential 
concern to the Data Qualification Team because the simulated fluxes along the boundaries of the 
SZ site-scale flow models account for most of the flow through those models. In this report, the 
fluxes in the three regional model layers were combined to provide total flow across the 
boundary for vertical panels of various widths extending from the water table to a depth of 
2,750 m below the water table. The uncertainties are incorporated into the SZ site-scale models 
by treating the fluxes as target values during model calibration (BSC 2004 [DIRS 170037]). 
Fixed head boundary conditions were derived around the perimeter of the SZ site-scale models 
from regional water level and head data, where heads were varied laterally along the model 
perimeter, but were held constant in the vertical direction and in BSC 2004 [DIRS 170037]). 
Other targets were also considered during base-case SZ site-scale flow model calibration that 
affect fluxes, including rock permeabilities and specific discharge estimates given by the 
Saturated Zone Expert Elicitation Panel (BSC 2004 [DIRS 170037]). A comparison of the 
resulting calibrated boundary fluxes of the site-scale model with those determined from the 
regional model shows a reasonable match of total boundary fluxes, but greater differences, some 
on the order of 100 percent, for individual boundary segments (BSC 2004 [DIRS 170037]). 
These differences are attributed primarily to the greater resolution of the site-scale model (BSC 
2004 [DIRS 170037]). In addition, the pumping wells modeled in the 1997 DVRFS are not 
incorporated directly into the base-case SZ sitescale flow model. Thus, these discharges are 
effectively replaced by additional flux through the southern boundary of the base-case SZ 
site-scale flow model (which also made it difficult for the SZ model to match the target boundary 
conditions during calibration). Use of the regional model flux data as target rather than absolute 
values in the site-scale model is appropriate considering the uncertainties inherent in those data. 
Upon review of the alternative models (e.g., Waddell 1982 [DIRS 101062] and Rice 1984 
[DIRS 101284]), the Death Valley regional flow model was found to be the most appropriate 
source of information for both distributed recharge and lateral flow boundary conditions for the 
base-case SZ site-scale flow and transport model. 
B3.4 SUMMARY OF EVALUATION RESULTS 
The Data Qualification Team found the Death Valley regional flow model database to be well 
researched, the model to be appropriately constructed, and the resulting output to provide a 
reasonable simulation of regional groundwater flow. Quantification of the recharge component 
of flow was reviewed in particular detail because of the reliance placed on those data in this 
report. Several approaches to estimating recharge from precipitation were evaluated by the 
regional models authors before deciding on a modification of an empirical relationship 
developed by Maxey and Eakin (1950 [DIRS 100598]). This straightforward modification 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 B-13 October 2004 
consisted of scaling different zones within the model based upon local climate, slope, 
permeability, and vegetation. This is an entirely reasonable technique because it takes into 
account the specific terrain within the model domain and avoids blindly assign a single empirical 
expression for distributed recharge. Shortcomings of other, more recent techniques were 
identified, particularly for application to desert areas where small amounts of recharge are 
ignored. The Data Qualification Team notes that a modified Maxey-Eakin method was also used 
by the YMP in preparing report U0010, Simulation of Net Infiltration for Modern and Potential 
Future Climates (USGS 2001 [DIRS 166518]), and that the method is widely used and accepted 
by the technical community. 
The Maxey-Eakin method was modified in the regional model to make it more sensitive to the 
four critical potential recharge indicators within the region: altitude, slope-aspect, relative rock 
and soil permeability, and vegetation. Regional maps were prepared for each of these indicators 
and through a series of steps a final recharge database was produced. The accuracy and 
suitability of the database were evaluated by the model authors and found to be appropriate for 
regional modeling. It is noted, however, that even with the better-defined potential recharge 
areas, the rates are still based on an empirical relationship rather than actual measurements. 
Therefore, there is a significant uncertainty in the regional modeling. 
Within the area of the base-case SZ site-scale flow and transport model, the recharge fluxes from 
the regional model are consistent with similar magnitude fluxes independently estimated from 
the 1997 UZ site-scale flow model and with focused recharge from Fortymile Wash. The 
correlation between topography and recharge is similar in the regional and the UZ models. The 
magnitudes of recharge are also similar, ranging from near zero to 8 or 9 mm/year. Recharge 
rates from Fortymile Wash show a similar range and topographic influence as the other two 
sources. 
The Data Qualification Team found that the regional models input database was diligently 
compiled using appropriate methodologies that take into account the difficulties of handling 
large amounts of data for a large region as well as the relatively large uncertainties that are 
present in much of the developed information. Discharges from evapotranspiration, playa 
evaporation, spring flow, and pumping were well researched, particularly the evapotranspiration 
component which constituted the largest single source of discharge. As expected, recharge was 
dominated by infiltration of precipitation. The effort expended by the model authors to 
corroborate the various model inputs lent credibility to their results. 
The Data Qualification Team considers use of the MODFLOWP code in constructing the model 
to be appropriate. At the time of report preparation, the MODFLOW code had become an 
industry standard and the advantages of the MODFLOWP adaptation in simplifying the 
calibration process and evaluating the model results were important. The model authors do not 
modify the model without supporting hydrogeologic criteria and they maintaining the hydraulic 
parameter values within reasonable bounds. 
Based on the standard error of the regression of simulated and observed heads, the effective 
residual between actual and simulated heads was 45 m for most wells. The Data Qualification 
Team concurs with the model authors observation that good fits have residuals of less than 20 m 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 B-14 October 2004 
(1 percent of the total head drop), moderate fits have residuals of 20 to 60 m, and poor fits have 
residuals greater than 60 m. By these definitions, the overall goodness-of-fit of the regional 
model would be considered moderate. As a result, a degree of uncertainty must be associated 
with the model outputs. Nevertheless, the output from the 1997 DVRFS model is relevant and 
appropriate for its intended use. 
Uncertainties in the simulated fluxes along the lateral boundaries of the base-case SZ site-scale 
flow model are potentially significant because these fluxes constitute the greatest sources of flow 
in the site-scale model and they are not independently corroborated. However, these 
uncertainties were recognized in calibrating the site-scale model by using the regional model 
fluxes along with other data sources in a generalized manner as calibration targets rather than as 
fixed model inputs. Actual boundary conditions in the site-scale model were defined by fixed 
heads, which are better known than the boundary fluxes. This approach made the fluxes largely 
a function of the calibrated model permeabilities. A comparison of the resulting calibrated 
regional and site-scale model boundary fluxes shows reasonable matching of total fluxes, but 
also greater differences, some on the order of 100 percent, for individual boundary segments. 
These observations indicate that the use of the regional model flux data in the site-scale model is 
appropriately generalized considering the uncertainties inherent in those data. 
B4. EVALUATION CONCLUSIONS 
The conclusions of the Data Qualification Team's review of the regional model are presented 
below in terms of the evaluation criteria presented in the controlling plan, AP-SIII.2Q. 
1. Are the methods used to develop the Death Valley regional groundwater model 
reasonable and generally accepted by the technical community? 
The methods used to develop the database, the choice of models, the methods of 
calibration, and the analysis of the results are all reasonable and generally 
accepted by the technical community. The use of GSIS to store, manipulate, and 
analyze the data is also accepted by the technical community. 
2. Are the methods used in this report to develop boundary conditions from the 
regional modeling results reasonable and generally accepted by the technical 
community? 
The nested model approach for obtaining lateral flux boundary conditions for 
smaller models is well established and accepted by the technical community. The 
recharge boundary for the regional model was developed using a modified 
Maxey-Eakin method, which is also well established and accepted by the 
technical community. 
3. Are there more appropriate sources of information for developing the boundary 
conditions required in this report? 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 B-15 October 2004 
Other sources of similar information are older and less well developed than the 
Death Valley regional flow model. The regional model was developed, in part, to 
support site-scale modeling. It provides a reasonable and comprehensive 
simulation of regional flow, and is an appropriate source of information for 
developing hydrologic boundary conditions for the site-scale model. 
4. Are the boundary condition data and their associated uncertainties acceptable for 
their intended use? 
Uncertainties in the lateral boundary condition data have been appropriately 
addressed by making them target values for base-case SZ site-scale flow model 
calibration. The calibration has been successfully completed using this approach, 
indicating that the boundary condition data have been successfully used and are 
therefore acceptable for their intended use. In addition, much of the source data 
for the regional model are YMP-accepted data, the MODFLOWP code has been 
qualified for project use, the regional model has been validated and residual 
uncertainties have been identified, and the modeling effort was adequately 
reviewed and documented. Furthermore, it should be noted that differences 
between the 1997 DVRFS and the 2001 DVRFS models, while not extraordinary, 
can largely be attributed to the fact that the 1997 DVRFS model simulates 
conditions found in the early 1990s (includes groundwater pumping) and the 2001 
DVRFS model simulates predevelopment conditions (no pumping). 
B5. RECOMMENDATIONS 
The Data Qualification Team has concluded that the Death Valley regional flow model database 
was well researched, the model was appropriately constructed, and the resulting output provides 
a reasonable simulation of regional groundwater flow based on application of all evaluation 
criteria. At the time of publication, this model was the most recent and best-supported SZ flow 
model of the Yucca Mountain region. It incorporated updated geological and hydrogeological 
data, it benefited from contemporary geological and hydrogeological conceptual models, and it 
provided a three-dimensional representation of the region. Upon review of the alternatives, the 
Death Valley regional flow model was found to be an appropriate source of information for both 
recharge and lateral flux boundary conditions for the SZ site-scale flow and transport model. 
Based on the foregoing evaluation, the Data Qualification Team has concluded that the Death 
Valley regional flow model provides a qualified source of data for establishing recharge and 
lateral flux boundary conditions for the SZ site-scale flow and transport model. In accordance 
with AP-SIII-2Q, this finding qualifies these data only for their intended uses in this report. The 
source DTN: GS960808312144.003 [DIRS 105121] will remain unqualified for other uses. 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 B-16 October 2004 
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 October 2004 
APPENDIX C 
ONE-TIME USE QUALIFICATION OF DTN: LB971212001254.001

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 October 2004 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 C-1 October 2004 
C1. INTRODUCTION 
C1.1 PURPOSE 
This Internal Data Qualification Report evaluates the appropriateness of unqualified data from 
the 1997 UZ site-scale flow model for use in this report, Recharge and Lateral Groundwater 
Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and Transport Model, 
Revision 01. This qualification report was prepared as an appendix to this report. 
The UZ site-scale model was developed to complete the base-case flow field simulations for the 
total system performance analysis for viability assessment. 39 steady-state flow fields were 
developed for this purpose with separate groups of these fields presented in separate reports. 
These simulations were intended to consider the ranges and uncertainties of present and future 
infiltration rates and different fracture-matrix interaction models. Outputs from the 1997 and 
2003 UZ site-scale models were used in this report to identify groundwater recharge from the UZ 
to the SZ. Because the 2003 UZ site-scale model is already qualified, this evaluation pertains 
only to those data used from the 1997 version and is performed in accordance with the internal 
data qualification requirements of AP-SIII.2Q, Qualification of Unqualified Data. Qualification 
will be performed through a combination of corroboration of data and technical assessment as 
described in Attachment 3 of AP-SIII.2Q. Qualification of these data will support the license 
application, but only for the uses detailed in this report. 
C1.2 SCOPE 
This appendix was prepared according to the Internal Data Qualification Plan presented in the 
Technical Work Plan for: Natural System - Saturated Zone Analysis and Model Report 
Integration (BSC 2004 [DIRS 171421]). The Internal Data Qualification Plan identifies one data 
tracking number (DTN: LB971212001254.001 [DIRS 104749]) containing unqualified, 
developed hydrogeological data associated with the 1997 UZ site-scale model, which is used in 
this report. DTN: LB971212001254.001 [DIRS 104749] is entitled Recharge from the 1997 UZ 
Site-Scale Flow Model Area. 
C1.3 DATA QUALIFICATION TEAM 
Chairperson. The Chairperson for this internal data qualification, Scott C. James, is the 
originator of this report. 
Team Member. The team member for this internal data qualification is Thomas S. Lowry. 
C1.4 BACKGROUND 
The data from DTN: LB971212001254.001 [DIRS 104749] that were used in this report are 
presented by Wu et al. (1997 [DIRS 156453]), in Providing Base-Case Flow Fields for 
TSPA-VA: Evaluation of Uncertainty of Present Day Infiltration Rates Using DKM/Base-Case 
and DKM/Weeps Parameter Sets. Although that report is unqualified, the data sources it draws 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 C-2 October 2004 
from as well as the software used for the simulations are qualified in accordance with standard 
YMP quality assurance requirements. 
Wu et al. (1997 [DIRS 156453]) present 29 steady-state flow fields generated using ten different 
parameter sets calibrated using three difference infiltration scenarios and two fracture-matrix 
interaction models. DTN: LB97121200124.001 is from Run #7, labeled flow field #LBL-FF#17 
(Wu et al. 1997 [DIRS 156453], Table 6.1, p. 11), and represents the present-day infiltration rate 
under the base-case mesh. The flow fields are based on steady-state solutions of two-phase 
water and gas-flow equations of the TOUGH2 code (Pruess 1987 [DIRS 100684] and 1991 
[DIRS 100413]). DTN: LB97121200124.001 is used in this report to quantitatively assess 
differences between recharge from updated flow models (i.e., the 2001 DVRFS and 2003 UZ 
site-scale flow models with Fortymile Wash) and those that will be used in the base-case SZ 
site-scale flow model (i.e., the 1997 DVRFS and UZ site-scale flow models with Fortymile 
Wash). Therefore, qualification of DTN: LB97121200124.001 is necessary for the analysis. 
C2. QUALIFICATION APPROACH 
C2.1 QUALIFICATION METHODS 
A combination of two methods, as outlined in Attachment 3 of AP-SIII.2Q, is used to qualify 
DTN: LB97121200124.001. First, DTN: LB97121200124.001 will be qualified by 
corroboratively comparing it to the output from the qualified 2003 version of the UZ site-scale 
model. Secondly, additional support will be given to the qualification through technical 
assessment of the approach and methods used by Wu et al. (1997 [DIRS 156453]). 
C2.2 EVALUATION CRITERIA 
Evaluation Criteria: The unqualified data were evaluated for use in this report based on 
consideration of the following evaluation criteria. These criteria were selected to incorporate the 
considerations in AP-SIII.2Q, Attachment 3, Considerations for Determining Qualification 
Methods, and AP-SIII.2Q, Attachment 4, Qualification Process Attributes. 
1. Are the methods used to develop the 1997 UZ site-scale model reasonable and 
generally accepted by the technical community? 
2. Are there data comparisons that can substantiate or confirm the validity of 
DTN:LB97121200124.001? 
3. Are there more appropriate sources of information for developing the boundary 
conditions required in this report? 
4. Are the boundary condition data and their associated uncertainties acceptable for their 
intended use? 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 C-3 October 2004 
Recommendation Criteria: A recommendation for internal qualification is based on the 
satisfactory resolution of one or more of the evaluation criteria. Although these criteria are 
considered in determining whether the data are appropriate for their intended use in this report, 
the conclusions of the Data Qualification Team are based on expert judgment, even though all 
evaluation criteria are met. 
C3. EVALUATION RESULTS 
A technical assessment of the 1997 UZ site-scale model (Wu et al. 1997 [DIRS 156453]) was 
performed by evaluating the qualified status of the models input database and code used for the 
simulation. Additionally, corroboration to DTN: LB03023DSSCP9I.001 [DIRS 163044], which 
is the present day infiltration rate from the qualified 2003 UZ site-scale flow model, are made. 
Each of these elements of the review is discussed in the following sections of this appendix. 
C3.1 QUALIFIED STATUS 
Inputs to the UZ site-scale flow model consist mainly of geologic, hydrogeologic, and 
geochemistry data. Table 2.1 from Wu et al. (1997 [DIRS 156453], p. 7) lists 22 data sources, 
their Q status, as well as their DTNs. In every case, the data input source is qualified under 
approved YMP Quality Assurance Procedures. In addition, the flow fields generated by Wu 
et al. (1997 [DIRS 156453]) are based on steady-state solutions of two-phase water and gas-flow 
equations in the TOUGH2 code (Pruess 1987 [DIRS 100684]; 1991 [DIRS 100413]), which is a 
fully qualified code that has since been successfully used for many YMP calculations. 
C3.2 CORROBORATION 
The 2003 data (DTN:LB03023DSSCP9I.001 [DIRS 163044]) are described in BSC (2004 
[DIRS 169861]) and is fully qualified. This version of the UZ site-scale model was enhanced 
from the 1997 version by incorporating the conceptual repository design with new grids, 
recalibration of property sets, and a more comprehensive validation effort (BSC 2004 
[DIRS 169861], p. 1-1). The flow fields developed are spatially varying maps representing the 
mean, lower, and upper bounds of estimated net infiltration for the current climate and two 
projected future climates (monsoon and glacial transition), resulting in a total of nine base-case 
flow fields. This differs from the 29 flow fields generated by Wu et al. (1997 [DIRS 156453]). 
As in the work of Wu et al. (1997 [DIRS 156453]), TOUGH2 V1.4 was used to generate flow 
fields and three-dimensional gas flow (LBNL 2000 [DIRS 146496]). Additionally, the grid used 
in the 2003 UZ site-scale model is approximately 16 percent smaller than that used in the 1997 
version. 
C3.3 ANALYSIS 
With regards to the qualified status of the work of Wu et al. (1997 [DIRS 156453]), it is apparent 
that the document remained unqualified because it was not subsequently used for further 
analysis. The Data Qualification Team could find no documented evidence as to why the work 
of Wu et al. (1997 [DIRS 156453]) could not or should not be unqualified. That fact, coupled 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 C-4 October 2004 
with our confidence in the approach and methodology used by Wu et al. (1997 [DIRS 156453]), 
presents a sound case for the qualification of DTN: LB97121200124.001. 
A more quantitative argument can be made through corroborative comparison of the numerical 
results of the 1997 and 2003 models. The main difference between the two models is not in the 
flux through the bottom of the UZ site-scale models, which are within 1 percent of each other on 
a per area basis, but rather, it is the spatial distribution of the infiltration that is different. The 
agreement between fluxes out the bottom of each model is expected because the recharge rate 
applied to the top of each model is the same for both versions. This confirms the consistency of 
the TOUGH2 (Pruess 1987 [DIRS 100684] and 1991 [DIRS 100413]) calculations. The 
difference in the spatial distribution of the flux through the bottom of the model is also expected 
due to the change in grid configuration and the inclusion of faults in the 2003 model. Visually, 
the 1997 model, as shown in Figure 6-4, shows a more even distribution as compared to the 2003 
model (Figure 6-5), which shows infiltration concentrating along fault lines. 
The difference in the spatial distribution of the two models is reduced when the infiltration rates 
are upscaled to the coarser 500  500 m2 grid of the SZ site-scale model. This is illustrated in 
Figures 6-10 and 6-12. The 1997 UZ model, when upscaled to the larger grid, shows higher 
rates of recharge in the northwest region of the UZ site-scale model domain, while the 2003 
version shows slightly higher rates towards the northeast region of its domain. However, in 
relation to the SZ modeling domains, the differences in spatial infiltration shift the areas of high 
infiltration by only a couple of cell widths. 
Furthermore, when comparing the two infiltration patterns on the SZ site-scale grids (Figures 6-7 
and 6-9), the relative impact of the UZ site-scale model input is clearly seen. Overall, the 1997 
and 2003 UZ site-scale flow models supply about 28 percent and 7 percent of the total recharge 
to the SZ site-scale models when recharge for the areas outside the UZ site-scale flow model 
domain are taken from the 1997 and 2001 DVRFS models, respectively . This means that the 
impact of uncertainty in the UZ infiltration rates is minor compared to other inputs to the model. 
This impact is further reduced when one considers the UZ inflow as a percentage of inflow from 
the lateral boundaries (0.8 percent and 1.2 percent for the 1997 UZ/DVRFS models and the 2003 
UZ/2001 DVRFS models, respectively). 
Because of the averaging effect of the upscaling process from the UZ site-scale models to the SZ 
model, the agreement in total flux between the 1997 and 2003 versions, and the relatively minor 
contribution of the UZ infiltration to the overall water budget, the Data Qualification Team 
believes that DTN: LB97121200124.001 is of quality origin and represents the best estimate of 
recharge distribution in that area, given the limitations and purposes of the model. 
C4. EVALUATION CONCLUSIONS 
The conclusions of the Data Qualification Team's review of the regional model are presented 
below in terms of the evaluation criteria presented in the controlling plan (BSC 2004 
[DIRS 171421]). 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 C-5 October 2004 
1. Are the methods used to develop the 1997 UZ site-scale model reasonable and 
generally accepted by the technical community? 
The 1997 UZ site-scale flow model follow accepted and standard modeling 
practices. The fact that the inputs and the modeling code are all qualified under 
standard YMP quality assurance procedures supports the validity of the approach. 
2. Are there data comparisons that can substantiate or confirm the validity of 
DTN: LB97121200124.001? 
DTN: LB97121200124.001 compares favorably to DTN:LB03023DSSCP9I.001 
[DIRS: 163044], which is the output from the qualified 2003 version of the UZ 
site-scale flow model. The magnitude of the bottom boundary outflow rates are 
within 1 percent of each other on a per area basis with the main differences being 
the spatial distribution of the outflow. The 2003 model shows outflow 
concentrated mainly along fault lines while the 1997 version shows a more even 
distribution. However, given the intent and inputs of each model, this change in 
spatial distribution is to be expected. 
3. Are there more appropriate sources of information for developing the boundary 
conditions required in this report? 
Both the 1997 and 2003 versions of the UZ site-scale model represent adequate 
estimates of recharge flux and distribution, considering the uncertainties within 
each model. In addition, the recharges to this area from the corresponding 
location in the DVRFS models are of the same order of magnitude, but considered 
less accurate with respect to their distribution. 
4. Are the boundary condition data and their associated uncertainties acceptable for 
their intended use? 
As mentioned above, the 1997 and 2003 versions of the UZ site-scale model 
represent adequate estimates of recharge flux and distribution for the area under 
the UZ model footprint. Use of outflow from one model (the UZ site-scale 
model) as input to another model (SZ model) is standard practice in the modeling 
community. Uncertainties in the flux rate and distribution are inherent in the UZ 
site-scale models, but these uncertainties have been minimized using qualified 
input data as well as the use of qualified codes. There exists no other method for 
determining the flux rate and distribution through this area that would produce an 
appreciable reduction in uncertainty. 
C5. RECOMMENDATIONS 
The Data Qualification Team has concluded that the 1997 UZ site-scale model (Wu et al. 1997 
[DIRS 156453]) was well researched, the model was appropriately constructed, and the resulting 
output provides a reasonable simulation of flow from the UZ to the SZ in the immediate 
repository area. All inputs to the model, as well as the simulation software of the model, are 

Recharge and Lateral Groundwater Flow Boundary Conditions for the Saturated Zone Site-Scale Flow and 
Transport Model 
ANL-NBS-MD-000010 REV 01 C-6 October 2004 
qualified under standard YMP quality assurance procedures and the results corroborate well with 
the qualified 2003 version of the model. Based on the foregoing evaluation, the Data 
Qualification Team has concluded that the 1997 UZ site-scale model (Wu et al. 1997 
[DIRS 156453]), provides a qualified source of data for establishing recharge to the SZ flow and 
transport model. In accordance with AP-SIII-2Q, this finding qualifies these data only for their 
intended uses in this report. The source DTN:LB97121200124.001 will remain unqualified for 
other uses.