Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 Rev 00, ICN 00

ANL-NBS-HS-000041

September 2002

1. PURPOSE 
The purpose of the Thermal Testing Measurements Report (Scientific Analysis Report) is to 
document, in one report, the comprehensive set of measurements taken within the Yucca 
Mountain Project Thermal Testing Program since its inception in 1996. Currently, the testing 
performed and measurements collected are either scattered in many level 3 and level 4 milestone 
reports or, in the case of the ongoing Drift Scale Test, mostly documented in eight informal 
progress reports. Documentation in existing reports is uneven in level of detail and quality. 
Furthermore, while all the data collected within the Yucca Mountain Site Characterization 
Project (YMP) Thermal Testing Program have been submitted periodically to the Technical Data 
Management System (TDMS), the data structureseveral incremental submittals, and 
documentation formatsare such that the data are often not user-friendly except to those who 
acquired and processed the data. 
The documentation in this report is intended to make data collected within the YMP Thermal 
Testing Program readily usable to end users, such as those representing the Performance 
Assessment Project, Repository Design Project, and Engineered Systems Sub-Project. Since 
either detailed level 3 and level 4 reports exist or the measurements are straightforward, only 
brief discussions are provided for each data set. These brief discussions for different data sets are 
intended to impart a clear sense of applicability of data, so that they will be used properly within 
the context of measurement uncertainty. This approach also keeps this report to a manageable 
size, an important consideration because the report encompasses nearly all measurements for 
three long-term thermal tests. As appropriate, thermal testing data currently residing in the 
TDMS have been reorganized and reformatted from cumbersome, user-unfriendly Input-Data 
Tracking Numbers (DTNs) into a new set of Output-DTNs. These Output-DTNs provide a 
readily usable data structure, including graphical displays and comprehensive spreadsheets. In 
some cases, there was no need to reformat or restructure Input-DTNs so they remained 
unchanged. 
Thermal testing measurement data come from the characterization (pre-heating/baseline and 
post-cooling) and testing (heating and cooling) phases of the Large Block Test (LBT), the Single 
Heater Test (SHT), and the Drift Scale Test (DST). Since the LBT and SHT are completed, all 
phases of those two tests are addressed. DST measurements addressed in this report include preheating 
and the entire four-year heating phase, which ended January 14, 2002. Discussion of 
measurements from the ongoing cooling phase will be included in future revision(s) of this 
report. 
The objective of the YMP Thermal Testing Program is to gain a more in-depth understanding of 
the coupled thermal (T), hydrological (H), mechanical (M), and chemical (C) processes. 
Satisfaction of this objective will ultimately lead to better understanding of how thermally driven 
coupled processes would affect the performance of the waste packages and the flow and 
transport of radionuclides (and consequently, the performance of the repository). The robust 
study of coupled-process behavior in the YMP Thermal Testing Program required a pioneering 
effort involving a blend of laboratory and field testing, along with numerical analyses using 
various process models. This program also utilized an approach to progress from smallersimpler-
shorter testing to larger-more complex-longer testing. For example, the Single Heater

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 1-2 September 2002 
Test served as a shakedown test for the DST in which several measurement concepts and 
devices were evaluated and improved while coupled processes were being studied. This strategy 
ensured advanced understanding of coupled-process behavior from refined and improved DST 
measurements and analyses. 
The YMP Thermal Testing Program, which was initially described in the Site Characterization 
Plan (U.S. Department of Energy [DOE] 1988 [100282]), identified seven types of tests. In 1994, 
the YMP thermal testing program was re-evaluated, resulting in two phases of test consolidation. 
The first phase, documented in the report entitled In-Situ Thermal Testing Program Strategy 
(DOE 1995 [130104]), presented five types of in situ thermal tests, including the LBT and the 
SHT. The second phase of test consolidation, documented in the report entitled Updated In Situ 
Thermal Testing Program Strategy (CRWMS M&O 1997 [111106]), was a more fundamental 
approach that included consideration of thermally driven coupled processes and related 
parameters. Additional scope included laboratory tests, analogs, modeling, performance 
confirmation monitoring, and a restructured suite of in situ thermal tests. The DST was 
developed from this second phase of test consolidation. 
The LBT, located in Fran Ridge, southeast of Yucca Mountain, is described in the Large Block 
Test Final Report (Lin et al. 2001 [159069]). The heating phase of the LBT started in February 
1997 and continued until March 1998, at which time the heaters were turned off. Cooling-phase 
measurements at the LBT were made until September 1998. Upon completion of the postcooling 
characterization of the LBT block, a final report was prepared (Lin et al. 2001 [159069]). 
The SHT, located in Alcove No. 5 of the Exploratory Studies Facility (ESF), is described in the 
Characterization of the ESF Thermal Test Area (CRWMS M&O 1996 [101428]), Single Heater 
Test Status Report (CRWMS M&O 1997 [101540]) and Single Heater Test Final Report 
(CRWMS M&O 1999 [129261]). The heating phase of the SHT started in August 1996 and 
continued for 275 days until May 1997. The cooling phase continued until January 1998, at 
which time post-cooling characterization of the test block commenced. Laboratory tests, 
modeling, analyses, and documentation were completed, and the final report (CRWMS M&O 
1999 [129261]) was submitted to the DOE in October 1999. 
The DST is described in the following reports: Drift Scale Test Design and Forecast Results 
(CRWMS M&O 1997 [146917]) and Drift Scale Test As-Built Report (CRWMS M&O 1998 
[111115]). The results from characterizing the test block are contained in the Ambient 
Characterization of the Drift Scale Test Block (CRWMS M&O 1997 [101539]). Early results of 
the DST are discussed in the Drift Scale Test Progress Report No. 1 (CRWMS M&O 1998 
[108306]). The heating phase of the DST started in December 1997 and lasted approximately 
four years until January 14, 2002. DST measurements through the entire four-year heating phase 
are reported in this Scientific Analysis Report. Cooling phase measurements are planned for 
future revision(s) of this report. 
Discussion of the thermal testing measurements in this report is organized first under the heading 
of the three tests: LBT, SHT, and DST; and then under the four processes: T, H, M, and C. 
Miscellaneous measurements and observations are also discussed. Although the list of 
measurement types is comprehensive, it is neither practical (because of finite report length) nor 
necessary to thoroughly discuss all data sets. For example, the DST measured temperatures come

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 1-3 September 2002 
from nearly 2,700 thermal sensors distributed throughout the test block and collected hourly, 
resulting in approximately 100 million measurements. Therefore, as appropriate for each 
measurement type, only a representative discussion of the test data behavior is presented. 
Readers are referred to user-friendly Output-DTNs for comprehensive data sets that include 
complementary graphics. 
The depth of the following discussions concerning the 12 basic measurement groups (three 
thermal tests and four processes) is dictated by their respective data characteristics. In general, 
discussions of thermal and mechanical measurements tend to be comparatively short, although 
the respective Output-DTNs contain comparatively large amounts of data. This condition reflects 
the inherent simplicity or straightforwardness of temperature and displacement measurements 
that are recorded frequently (hourly) on a data acquisition system. Conversely, discussions of 
hydrological and chemical measurements tend to be lengthier, while their Output-DTNs are 
comparatively small. The smaller output data sets result from measurements collected 
comparatively infrequently (monthly or longer) on a nonintegrated data acquisition system. The 
more lengthy discussion in the chemical-measurements sections relate to sampling procedures 
that have great relevance to the data collected. Also, in certain hydrological measurements, 
detailed explanations are needed for the complex data reduction that occurs as the data are 
transformed from Input-DTN data to more useful and functional Output-DTN data. Furthermore, 
since several level 3, level 4, and other technical documents exist (see prior comments on LBT, 
SHT, and DST reports), discussion of the measurement process was intentionally limited. More 
specifically, discussion of calibration, measurement technique, and scientific notebook entries, 
was, for the most part, not included in this report. Also, complete interpretations of the massive 
amount of measurement data acquired in the YMP thermal testing diagram was not attempted in 
this report. 
Uncertainty associated with most measurements is also discussed. These discussions are 
restricted to actual measurements and data reduction. If quantifiable uncertainties were cited, 
then either references to manufacturers specifications were provided or they were referred to as 
estimates. Standard error analyses (mean and standard deviation) were provided for applicable 
measurements such as repetitive measurements of laboratory or field parameters. Test 
measurements of a response for a specific location and time are not applicable for standard error 
analyses. Additional information on measurement uncertainties can be located via directions in 
DTNs cited in the first footnote of Tables 4-1, 4-2, and 4-3. This information, among other 
things, provides detailed discussions of scientific notebooks and calibration relationships 
relevant to uncertainties of thermal testing measurements. The approach taken provides sufficient 
discussion of uncertainties for end-users of thermal testing measurements such as process 
modelers. Uncertainty related to modeling and analyses between measured and simulated data 
will be discussed in Model Reports related to TH, THC, and THM process models. Also 
included in this report are summaries of three white papers involving in-depth investigations of 
unexpected or unusual behavior not uncommon in large-scale, long-term field testing such as the 
DST. The summaries are in Sections 6.3.2.6, 6.3.3.7, and 6.3.4.5. 
The measurements documented in this Scientific Analysis Report were conducted under the 
Technical Work Plan for: Unsaturated Zone Sections of License Application Chapters 8 and 12 
(BSC 2002 [159051]) and Test Plan for: Drift Scale Test (BSC 2002 [158190]).

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 1-4 September 2002 
The report is organized as follows: Section 2 addresses the applicability of the QA program. 
Section 3 discusses the use of controlled and baselined software. Section 4 provides a tabulation 
of technical product inputs (i.e., Input-DTNs) that were used to develop technical product 
outputs (i.e., Output-DTNs). Assumptions used in the scientific analyses are documented in 
Section 5. Discussion of the thermal test measurements for each of the three thermal tests are 
provided in Section 6. Summary and sources of Inputs-DTNs, software, and cited references are 
presented in Sections 7 and 8, respectively.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 2-1 September 2002 
2. QUALITY ASSURANCE 
The activities documented in this Scientific Analysis Report were determined to be subject to the 
requirements of the U.S. DOE Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management (OCRWM) 
Quality Assurance Requirements and Description (DOE 2002 [159475]). It was prepared in 
accordance with AP-SIII.9Q, Scientific Analyses. Specifically, this investigation of thermal test 
measurements is consistent with the direction delineated in the Technical Work Plan for: 
Unsaturated Zone Sections of License Application Chapters 8 and 12 (BSC 2002 [159051]) and 
the Test Plan for: Drift Scale Test (BSC 2002 [158190]) which were prepared in accordance with 
AP-2.27Q, Planning for Science Activities, and AP-SIII.7Q, Scientific Investigation Laboratory 
and Field Testing, respectively. 
The document identifier was obtained as per AP-6.1Q, Controlled Documents. Input DTNs were 
documented in accordance with AP-3.15Q, Managing Technical Product Inputs. Data not 
already in the Technical Data Management System (TDMS) were submitted to the TDMS in 
accordance with AP-SIII.3Q, Submittal and Incorporation of Data to the Technical Data 
Management System. Software, as applicable, was obtained, controlled, and documented as per 
AP-SI.1Q, Software Management. Process controls on specific uses of electronically stored 
information, including information residing in an electronic information management system or 
on electronic media, were evaluated as per AP-SV.1Q, Control of the Electronic Management of 
Information. 
The methods used for control of electronic management of data are in accordance with those 
specified in the Technical Work Plan for: Unsaturated Zone Sections of License Application 
Chapters 8 and 12 (BSC 2002 [159051]). Specifically, electronic management of information is 
controlled under the following organization-specific procedures: YMP-LBNL-QIP-SV.0, 
Management of YMP-LBNL Electronic Data for Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory 
(LBNL); 033-YMP-QP-3.8, Control of the Electronic Management of Data for Lawrence 
Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL); and LANL-YMP-QP-S5.01, Electronic Data 
Management, for Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL). 
For work done by the U. S. Geological Survey (USGS), four electronic databases on work 
stations/personal computers are in use by the USGS Environmental Science Team. The databases 
are backed up on a fixed schedule and whenever blocks of new data are added. Backed-up files 
are stored on fixed and removable magnetic media and removal optical media. Backup media are 
kept in secure areas remote from the workstations/personal computers. Backup is also provided 
by hard copies of original raw data and by laboratory notebooks. Completeness and accuracy of 
data input are assured through multiple checking steps. A final check is attained by retrieving 
data from the database and physically checking it against the original input records. Any errors 
are corrected and the records are rechecked after correction. Records of this checking process are 
maintained. Data packages submitted to the TDMS are prepared by outputting the data from the 
databases commonly through spreadsheets. It is not necessary to rekey the data once they are in 
the databases and have undergone final checks. 
For work done by Sandia National Laboratories (SNL), the requirements of AP-SV.1Q were met 
by the following measures: Computers used for processing and storing information will be

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 2-2 September 2002 
password-protected. All files will be backed up on magnetic media monthly or oftener as needed. 
Backup media will be labeled with the date and time of backup, DOE serial number of the 
computer backed up, system utility used to perform the backup, and format of the magnetic 
media. Information transfers from one computer to another was done by magnetic media, 
internet, or local network, using file transfer protocol (FTP) or attachments to e-mail on the same 
system. These transfer methods are quite dependable and generally error-free. In most cases, 
such transfers are between computers that use a common operating system and storage format. In 
these cases, the name, date, and file size was visually checked. ASCII files was also be verified 
by visual comparison of the data. All such visual checks was documented in a scientific 
notebook maintained in accordance with AP-SIII.1Q, Scientific Notebooks. 
For work done by Integrated Science Solutions (ISS), the requirement of AP-SV.1Q was met by 
the following measures: Computers used for processing and storing information will be 
password-protected. All files will be backed up on magnetic media monthly or oftener as needed. 
Backup media was labeled with the date and time of backup, DOE serial number of the computer 
backed up, system utility used to perform the backup, and format of the magnetic media. 
Information transfers from one computer to another was done by magnetic media, internet, or 
local network, using FTP or attachments to e-mail on the same system. These transfer methods 
are quite dependable and generally error-free. In most cases, such transfers are between 
computers that use a common operating system and storage format. In these cases, the name, 
date, and file size was visually checked. ASCII files was also verified by visual comparison of 
the data. 
Scientific notebooks, as applicable, were used as per AP-SIII.1Q. As required, this Scientific 
Analysis Report includes the quality level of the thermal testing measurements as per AP-2.22Q, 
Classification Criteria and Maintenance of the Monitored Geologic Repository Q-List. The 
conclusions of this report do not affect the repository design or permanent items. 
A checker and Bechtel SAIC Company, LLC (BSC) Quality Engineering Representative (QER) 
reviews were conducted per AP-SIII.9Q. In addition, an LBNL technical review and Engineering 
Assurance (EA) review were performed per YMP-LBNL-QIP-6.1, Document Review. Upon 
completion, an interdisciplinary review was conducted in accordance with AP-2.14Q, Review of 
Technical Products and Data. Upon approval of the checking and interdisciplinary reviews, this 
Scientific Analysis Report was processed in accordance with AP-6.1Q. Modifications, as 
applicable, resulting from the DOEs review were implemented as per AP-7.5Q, Submittal, 
Review, and Acceptance of Deliverables. The records required by Sections 6.1 and 6.2 of APSIII.
9Q were collected and submitted to the Records Processing Center in accordance with AP- 
17.1Q, Record Source Responsibilities for Inclusionary Records. The records listed in Section 
6.3 of AP-SIII.9Q were dispositioned by the Record Source per requirements in AP-32.4, 
Records Retention and Disposition. 
Relevant Technical Implementing Procedures are listed in Section 8.2.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 3-1 September 2002 
3. USE OF SOFTWARE 
As per Section 5.3 and Attachment 3  Item 3 of AP-SIII.9Q, the use of software applies to those 
activities associated with the scientific analyses of this report. Basically, the scientific analyses 
for this report involves restructuring, as needed, Input-DTNs into more user-friendly Output- 
DTNs. This process involves only limited use of commercial off-the-shelf graphic packages and 
spreadsheet software which is exempt from the control requirements of AP-SI.1Q, Software 
Management. Nonetheless, computations using the standard functions of commercial software 
need to be discussed as per Attachment 3  Item 3 of AP-SIII.9Q. The software used for the 
scientific analyses of this Scientific Analysis Report (in restructuring Input-DTN into Output- 
DTN) are Microsoft EXCEL: Versions 97 and 2000, operating systems Windows 98, Windows 
NT and Windows 2000. The input and output data are listed respectively in the Input-DTN and 
Output-DTN columns of Tables 6.1-1, 6.2-1 and 6.3-1. 
In majority of data presented in Tables 6.1-1, 6.2-1 and 6.3-1 the process involved in going from 
the input data in the Input-DTN column to the output data in the Output-DTN column involves 
simple reorganization, sorting and no calculation. The exceptions are: 
1. For the air-permeability data where the data reduction processes is described in 
Sections 5.1. The specific Output-DTNs are: 
. LB0208AIRKSHTC.001 in Table 6.2-1 
. LB0208AIRKDSTH.001 in Table 6.3-1 
The input data are as listed in the respective Input-DTN columns and the equation used 
is Eq. 5.1-1 
2. For the smoothed MPDX displacement and strain data where the smoothing process is 
discussed in Section 5.2. The specific Output DTNs are: 
. SN0207F3912298.037 in Table 6.3-1 
. SN0208F3912298.039 in Table 6.3-1 
. SN0203F3912298.038 in Table 6.3-1 
The input data are as listed in the respective Input-DTN columns and smoothing 
process is as discussed in Section 5.2.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 3-2 September 2002 
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 4-1 September 2002 
4. INPUTS 
The following discussion provides a listing of Input-DTNs for measurements of characterization 
and test data from each of the three thermal tests (Large Block Test (LBT), Single Heater Test 
(SHT), and Drift Scale (DST)). Since many of these DTNs were developed in an incremental 
manner during the duration of each test, several DTNs need to be accessed to examine 
measurements for the duration of the already completed thermal tests (LBT and SHT) and the 
four-year heating phase of the DST. This cumbersome aspect of many of the following Input- 
DTNs has been corrected with restructured and better organized Output-DTNs listed in Tables 
6.1-1, 6.2-1, and 6.3-1. The following tables identify the locations of the Input-DTNs in this 
documents text, which is also consistent with tables and figures cited in their respective 
sections. 
Applicable criteria and applicable codes and standards used in this Scientific Analysis Report are 
also discussed below. 
4.1 DATA AND PARAMETERS 
4.1.1 LARGE BLOCK TEST 
Table 4-1 provides Input-DTNs for characterization and test measurements from the LBT, along 
with where they were cited in this report. In the third column under the heading Type, the data 
are grouped according to the four processes: thermal (T), hydrological (H), mechanical (M), and 
chemical (C), plus a fifth category, general (G). 
4.1.2 SINGLE HEATER TEST 
Table 4-2 provides Input-DTNs for characterization and test measurements from the SHT, along 
with where they were cited in this report. In the third column under the heading Type, the data 
are grouped according to the four processes: thermal (T), hydrological (H), mechanical (M), and 
chemical (C), plus a fifth category, general (G). 
4.1.3 DRIFT SCALE TEST 
Table 4-3 provides Input-DTNs for characterization and test measurements from the DST along 
with where they were cited in this report. In the third column under the heading Type, the data 
are grouped according to the four processes: thermal (T), hydrological (H), mechanical (M), and 
chemical (C), plus a fifth category, general (G). 
4.2 CRITERIA 
There are no criteria from requirement documents that are identified as specific for this Scientific 
Analysis Report.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 4-2 September 2002 
4.3 CODES AND STANDARDS 
No specific formally established codes and standards have been identified as applying to this 
Scientific Analysis Report. Although some standards were used to obtain thermal testing 
measurements, this activity was upstream of the Input-DTN submittal, which would make it 
outside the scope of this report (See Section 1). Also, refer to key references cited in Section 1 
and corresponding background discussion in the Input-DTNs for information on applicable 
standards.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T4-1 September 2002 
Table 4-1. Input-DTNs for the Large Block Test1 
Report Location 
Input-DTN [DIRS] Description Type2 Q 
Status Text Figures Tables 
LL980918904244.074 [135872] Heater Power, Temperature, 
Relative Humidity, and Gas 
Pressure 
T,H Q 6.1.1.1 
6.1.1.2 
6.1.2.3 
6.1.1.1-1 
6.1.1.2-1 
6.1.1.2-2 
6.1.2.3-1 
6.1.2.3-2 
LL980913304244.072 [145385] Electrical Resistance Tomograms H Q 6.1.2.1 6.1.2.1-2 
6.1.2.1-3 
LL981001604244.079 [158261] Electrical Resistivity H Q 6.1.2.1 
LL980919304244.075 [145099] Neutron Logging H Q 6.1.2.2 6.1.2.2-1 
6.1.2.2-2 
6.1.2.2-3 
LL950812704242.017 [158237] Porosity, Saturated and Dry 
Density 
H non-Q3 6.1.2.4 6.1.2.4-2 
LL960905204244.022 [158244] Laboratory Matrix Permeability H Q 6.1.2.4 6.1.2.4-1 
LL981208404244.092 [158263] X-ray Radiography H Q 6.1.2.4 6.1.2.4-1 
LL980919404244.076 [148630] Rock Mass Displacements M Q 6.1.3.1 
6.1.3.2 
6.1.3.1-2 
LL960400404244.012 [158271] Fracture Mapping G Q 
LL960400504244.013 [158274] Fracture Mapping G Q 
LL960400604244.014 [158275] Fracture Mapping G Q 
LL960400704244.015 [158276] Fracture Mapping G Q 
6.1.4.1 6.1.4.1-1 
LL981202305912.004 [158270] Bacterial Transport C non-Q4 6.1.4.3 
NOTE: 1 DTNs: LA0106FH831151.002 [158230] and LA0106FH831151.003 [158229] provide access via Records Processing 
Center (RPC) to all thermal and mechanical data collected in LBT Data Collection System (original/electrical and 
converted/engineering units). These non-qualified DTNs also provide access (RPC) to pertinent supporting material 
such as scientific notebooks and calibration relationships. 
2 T=Thermal, H=Hydrological, M=Mechanical, C=Chemical, G=General/Miscellaneous. 
3 The status of the data is classified as non-Q because the data reporting was preliminary. Hence, these data should only 
be used for corroborative purposes. 
4 These data deal with bacteria abundance and bacterial types that are secondary to the primary objective of 
understanding the coupled processes. They should only be used for reference purposes.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T4-2 September 2002 
Table 4-2. Input-DTNs for the Single Heater Test1 
Report Location 
Input-DTN [DIRS] Description Type2 Q 
Status Text Figures Tables 
SNF35110695001.001 [158315] 
and 
LL970805504244.043 [158313] 
XYZ Coordinates of Boreholes 
and Sensors 
T,H,M,C Q 6.2 6.2-2 6.2-2 
SNF35110695001.008 [113812] Heater Power T Q 6.2.1.1 6.2.1.1-1 
SNF35110695001.008 [113812] Temperature  Heating and Initial 
Six Months of Cooling 
T Q 
SNF35110695001.009 [113819] Temperature  Last Two Months 
of Cooling 
T Q 
6.2.1.2 6.2.1.2-1 
6.2.1.2-2 
6.2.1.2-3 
6.2.1.2-4 
SNL22080196001.001 [109722] Thermal Conductivity T Q 6.2.1.3 6.2.1.3.-1 
LL970101004244.026 [158281] Electrical Resistance 
Tomography 
H Q 
LL970505404244.031 [148609] Electrical Resistance 
Tomography 
H Q 
LL971002904244.044 [158286] Electrical Resistance 
Tomography 
H Q 
LL980105204244.049 [148610] Electrical Resistance 
Tomography 
H Q 
6.2.2.1 6.2.2.1-1 
6.2.2.1-2 
LB980901123142.003 [119016] Ground Penetrating Radar Data H Q 6.2.2.2 6.2.2.2-1 
6.2.2.2-2 
6.2.2.2-3 
LL980106904244.051 [118963] Neutron Logging H Q 6.2.2.3 6.2.2.3-1 
6.2.2.3-2 
LB960500834244.001 [105587] Pre-Heating Air Injection H Q 6.2.2.4 6.2.2.4-1 
6.2.2.4-2 
6.2.2.4-4 
LB980120123142.008 [158280] Air Injections in Boreholes 16 and 
18, Part 1 of 4 
H Q 
LB970500123142.001 [158293] Air Injections in Boreholes 16 and 
18, Part 2 of 4 
H Q 
LB0204SHAIRK3Q.001 [159543] Air Injections in Boreholes 16 and 
18, Part 3 of 4 
H Q 
LB971000123142.001 [118965] Air Injections in Boreholes 16 and 
18, Part 4 of 4 
H Q 
6.2.2.4 6.2.2.4-1 
LB980901123142.001 [118999] Post-Cooling Air Injection and 
Gas Tracer Testing 
H Q 6.2.2.4 6.2.2.4-3 
6.2.2.4-4 
6.2.2.4-5 
LB980901123142.002 [119009] Temperature, Relative Humidity, 
Gauge Pressure (Passive 
Monitoring) 
T,H Q 6.2.2.4 6.2.2.4-2 
6.2.2.4-3 
6.2.2.4-4 
LB970500123142.003 [131500] Pre-Heating Laboratory 
Saturation, Porosity, Bulk Density 
Gravimetric Water Content 
H Q 6.2.2.5 6.2.2.5-1 
6.2.2.5-2 
LL970709004244.035 [127312] Pre-Heating Laboratory Porosity, 
Relative Humidity, and Water 
Saturation 
H Q 6.2.2.5 6.2.2.5-1 6.2.2.5-3 
LB980901123142.006 [119029] Post-Cooling Laboratory 
Saturation, Porosity, Bulk Density 
Gravimetric Water Content 
H Q 6.2.2.5 6.2.2.5-2 6.2.2.5-4

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T4-3 September 2002 
Table 4-2. Input-DTNs for the Single Heater Test1 (continued) 
Report Location 
Input-DTN [DIRS] Description Type2 Q 
Status Text Figures Tables 
SNF35110695001.008 [113812] Standard MPBX Displacements  
Heating and Initial Six Months of 
Cooling 
M Q 6.2.3.1 6.2.3.1-3 6.2.3.1-1 
6.2.3.1-2 
SNF35110695001.009 [113819] Standard MPBX Displacements  
Last Two Months of Cooling 
M Q 6.2.3.1 6.2.3.1-3 6.2.3.1-1 
LL980109904243.015 [158299] Optical MPBX Displacements M Q 6.2.3.1 
SNF35110695001.010 [158300] Rock Mass Deformation Modulus 
 Borehole (Goodman) Jack 
M Q 6.2.3.2 6.2.3.2-1 
SNF35110695001.008 [113812] Rock Bolt Load  Heating and 
Initial Six Months of Cooling 
M Q 
SNF35110695001.009 [113819] Rock Bolt Load  Last Two 
Months of Cooling 
M Q 
6.2.3.3 6.2.3.3-1 
SNL22080196001.001 [109722] Laboratory Thermal Expansion M Q 6.2.3.4 6.2.3.4-1 
6.2.3.4-2 
SNL22080196001.002 [158306] Pre-Heating Laboratory 
Unconfined Compressive 
Strength, Dry Bulk Density, 
Poissons Ratio, Youngs 
Modulus, Saturated Bulk Density, 
Seismic Velocity 
M Q 6.2.3.4 
SNL22080196001.003 [119042] Post-Cooling Laboratory Thermal 
Conductivity, Thermal Expansion, 
Unconfined Compressive 
Strength, Dry Bulk Density, 
Poisson's Ratio, Young's 
Modulus 
T, M Q 6.2.3.4 6.2.3.4-1 
6.2.3.4-2 
6.2.3.4-3 
SNF35110695001.008 [113812] Rock Mass Thermal Expansion M Q 6.2.3.5 6.2.3.5-1 
LL970101104244.027 [158309] Chemical Abundance Data C non-Q3 
LL970409604244.030 [111481] Chemical Abundance Data C non-Q3 
LL970703904244.034 [111482] Chemical Abundance Data C non-Q3 
LL971006604244.046 [148611] Chemical Abundance Data C non-Q3 
6.2.4.1 6.2.4.1-1 6.2.4.1-1 
LA0009SL831151.001 [153485] Fracture Mineralogy C Q 6.2.4.2 6.2.4.2-1 
6.2.4.2-2 
6.2.4.2-3 
LB970100123142.002 [158288] Infrared Images, Part 1 of 5 T, H Q 
LB970400123142.001 [158289] Infrared Images, Part 2 of 5 T, H Q 
LB970700123142.002 [158295] Infrared Images, Part 3 of 5 T, H Q 
LB971000123142.002 [158296] Infrared Images, Part 4 of 5 T, H Q 
LB980120123142.001 [158297] Infrared Images, Part 5 of 5 T, H Q 
6.2.5.2 
NOTE: 1 DTN LA0002FH6001WP.001 [158278] provides access via Records Processing Center (RPC) to all thermal and 
mechanical data collected in SHT Data Collection System (original/electrical and converted/engineering units). This 
non-qualified DTN also provides access (RPC) to pertinent supporting material such as scientific notebooks and 
calibration relationships. 
2 T=Thermal, H=Hydrological, M=Mechanical, C=Chemical, G=General/Miscellaneous. 
3 These four sets of data are classified as non-Q due to the disposition of a non-conformance report regarding 
measurement and testing equipment. Hence, these data should only be used for corroborative purposes.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T4-4 September 2002 
Table 4-3. Input-DTNs for the Drift Scale Test1 
Report Location 
Input-DTN [DIRS] Description Type2 Q 
Status Text Figures Tables 
MO0002ABBLSLDS.000 [147304] XYZ Coordinates of Boreholes 
and Sensors 
T,H,M,C Q 6.3 6.3-2 
6.3-3 
6.3-4 
6.3-5 
6.3-6 
6.3-7 
6.3-8 
6.3.3.1-1 
6.3-2 
MO9807DSTSET01.000 [113644] Heater, Power, Current, Voltage, 
Temperature: November 7, 1997 
 May 1998 
T Q 
MO9810DSTSET02.000 [113662] Heater, Power, Current, Voltage, 
Temperature: June 1998  
August 1998 
T Q 
MO9906DSTSET03.000 [113673] Heater, Power, Current, Voltage, 
Temperature: September 1998  
May 1999 
T Q 
MO0001SEPDSTPC.000 [153836] Heater, Power, Current, Voltage, 
Temperature: June 1999  
October 1999 
T Q 
MO0007SEPDSTPC.001 [153707] Heater, Power, Current, Voltage, 
Temperature: November 1999  
May 2000 
T Q 
MO0012SEPDSTPC.002 [153708] Heater, Power, Current, Voltage, 
Temperature: June 2000  
November 2000 
T Q 
MO0107SEPDSTPC.003 [158321] Heater, Power, Current, Voltage, 
Temperature: December 2000  
May 2001 
T Q 
MO0202SEPDSTTV.001 [158320] Heater, Power, Current, Voltage, 
Temperature: June 2001  
January 14, 2002 
T Q 
6.3.1.1 
6.3.1.2 
5.2-2 
6.3.1.1-1 
6.3.1.2-1 
6.3.1.2-2 
6.3.1.2-3 
6.3.1.2-4 
6.3.1.2-5 
6.3.1.2-6 
6.3.1.2-7 
6.3.1.2-8 
6.3.1.2-9 
SNL22100196001.006 [158213] Thermal Conductivity as Function 
of Saturation 
T Q 6.3.1.3 
SN0203L2210196.007 [158322] Thermal Expansion Thermal 
Conductivity DST Specimens 
T,M Q 6.3.1.3 6.3.1.3-1 
6.3.1.3-2 
LL980411004244.060 [159107] DST Baseline REKA Probe 
Measurements. Temperature 
Measurements using REKA 
Probes: 11/14/97 - 7/31/98. 
T Q 6.3.1.4 
LL980411104244.061 [159111] DST Baseline REKA Probe 
Measurements for Thermal 
Conductivity and Diffusivity. VA 
Supporting Data 
T Q 
LL980902104244.070 [159109] DST Baseline REKA Probe 
Measurements for Thermal 
Conductivity and Diffusivity. 
Probe 1 from Borehole #153, 
Probe 2 from Borehole #152, 
Probe 3 from Borehole #151. 
T Q 
6.3.1.4

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T4-5 September 2002 
Table 4-3. Input-DTNs for the Drift Scale Test1 (continued) 
Report Location 
Input-DTN [DIRS] Description Type2 Q 
Status Text Figures Tables 
UN0106SPA013GD.003 [159115] DST REKA Probe Acquired Data 
for Thermal Conductivity and 
Diffusivity: 05/01/1998 to 
04/30/2001 
T Q 
UN0106SPA013GD.004 [159116] DST REKA Probe Developed 
Data for Thermal Conductivity 
and Diffusivity: 05/01/1998 to 
04/30/2001 
T Q 
UN0109SPA013GD.005 [159117] DST Rapid Evaluation of K and 
Alpha (REKA) Probe Acquired 
Data for Thermal Conductivity 
and Diffusivity: 05/01/2001 to 
08/31/2001 
T Q 
UN0112SPA013GD.006 [159118] DST REKA Probe Acquired Data 
for Thermal Conductivity and 
Diffusivity: 09/01/2001 to 
12/31/2001 
T Q 
UN0201SPA013GD.007 [159119] DST REKA Probe Developed 
Data for Thermal Conductivity 
and Diffusivity: 05/01/2001 to 
12/31/2001 
T Q 
6.3.1.4 
LL000804023142.009 [158325] Water Saturation H Q 6.3.2.1 6.3.2.1-1 
6.3.2.1-2 
LL980108804244.052 [158332] Electrical Resistivity H Q 
LL980406404244.057 [113782] Electrical Resistance 
Tomography 
H Q 
LL990702704244.099 [113872] Electrical Resistivity H Q 
LL980808604244.065 [113791] Electrical Resistance 
Tomography 
H Q 
6.3.2.1 
LB990630123142.005 [129274] Ground Penetrating Radar Data H Q 
LB000121123142.004 [158338] Ground Penetrating Radar Data H Q 
LB000718123142.004 [153354] Ground Penetrating Radar Data H Q 
LB0101GPRDST01.001 [158346] Ground Penetrating Radar Data H Q 
LB0108GPRDST05.001 [158440] Ground Penetrating Radar Data H Q 
6.3.2.2 6.3.2.2-1 
LL020710223142.024 [159551] Neutron Logging H Q 6.3.2.3 6.3.2.3-1 
6.3.2.3-2 
LB970600123142.001 [105589] Active DST Pre-Heating Air 
Injection, Part 1 of 2 
H Q 6.3.2.4 6.3.2.4-1 
LB980120123142.005 [114134] Active DST Pre-Heating Air 
Injection, Part 2 of 2 
H Q 6.3.2.4 6.3.2.4-2 
LB980120123142.004 [105590] Active Baseline Air Injections in 
Boreholes 57-61, 74-78, 185-186 
H Q 6.3.2.4 6.3.2.4-2 
6.3.2.4-3 
6.3.2.4-4 
6.3.2.4-3

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T4-6 September 2002 
Table 4-3. Input-DTNs for the Drift Scale Test1 (continued) 
Report Location 
Input-DTN [DIRS] Description Type2 Q 
Status Text Figures Tables 
LB980420123142.002 [113706] Active Hydrology Testing for 
Boreholes 57-61, 74-78, 185- 
186; Air Injection and Gas Tracer 
Tests 
H Q 6.3.2.4 6.3.2.4-2 
6.3.2.4-3 
6.3.2.4-4 
6.3.2.4-8 
LB980715123142.002 [113742] Active Hydrology Testing Data 
(Air Injection) Collected from 12 
Hydrology Boreholes: March 
1998 to May 1998 
H Q 
LB981016123142.002 [129245] Active Hydrology Testing for 
Boreholes 57-61, 74-78, 185- 
186; Air Injection Tests: June 
1998 to August 1999 
H Q 
6.3.2.4 6.3.2.4-2 
6.3.2.4-3 
6.3.2.4-4 
LB990630123142.001 [129247] Active Hydrology Testing by Air 
Injection: September 1998 to 
May 1999 
H Q 6.3.2.4 6.3.2.4-2 
6.3.2.4-3 
6.3.2.4-4 
6.3.2.4-5 
6.3.2.4-6 
LB000121123142.002 [158337] Active Hydrology Testing by Air 
Injection: June 1999 to October 
1999 
H Q 6.3.2.4 6.3.2.4-2 
6.3.2.4-3 
6.3.2.4-4 
LB000718123142.002 [158341] Active Hydrology Testing Data 
(Air Injection) Collected from 12 
Hydrology Holes: November 1, 
1999 to May 31, 2000 
H Q 6.3.2.4 6.3.2.4-1 
6.3.2.4-2 
6.3.2.4-3 
6.3.2.4-4 
LB0101AIRKDST1.001 [158345] Active Hydrology Testing Data 
(Air Injection) Collected from 12 
Hydrology Boreholes: June 1, 
2000 to November 30, 2000 
H Q 
LB0108AIRKDST5.001 [158438] Active Hydrology Testing Data 
(Air Injection) Collected from 12 
Hydrology Boreholes: 
December 1, 2000 to May 31, 
2001 
H Q 
LB0203AIRKDSTE.001 [158348] Active Hydrology Testing Data 
(Air Injection) Collected from 12 
Hydrology Boreholes: June 1, 
2001 to January 2002 
H Q 
6.3.2.4 6.3.2.4-2 
6.3.2.4-3 
6.3.2.4-4 
LB980420123142.001 [113696] Passive Monitoring Data for 
Boreholes 57-61, 74-78, 185- 
186: Nov 1997 to Feb 1998 
H Q 
LB980715123142.001 [113733] Passive Monitoring Data 
Collected from 12 Hydrology 
Boreholes: March 1998 to May 
1998 
H Q 
LB981016123142.001 [158353] Passive Monitoring Data for 
Boreholes 57-61, 74-78, 185-186 
Taken from June 1998 to Aug 
1998, 3rd Quarter 
H Q 
LB990630123142.002 [158355] Passive Monitoring Data 
(Relative Humidity, Pressure, 
Temperature): September 1998 
to May 1999 
H Q 
LB000121123142.001 [158335] Passive Monitoring Data 
(Relative Humidity, Pressure, 
Temperature): June 1 through 
October 31, 1999 
H Q 
6.3.2.4 6.3.2.4-7

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T4-7 September 2002 
Table 4-3. Input-DTNs for the Drift Scale Test1 (continued) 
Report Location 
Input-DTN [DIRS] Description Type2 Q 
Status Text Figures Tables 
LB000718123142.001 [158340] Passive Monitoring Data 
Collected from 12 Hydrology 
Boreholes Test: November 1, 
1999 to May 31, 2000 
H Q 
LB0101H2ODST01.001 [158347] Passive Monitoring Data 
Collected from 12 Hydrology 
Boreholes: June 1, 2000 to 
November 30, 2000 
H Q 
LB0108H2ODST05.001 [158441] Passive Monitoring Data 
Collected from 12 Hydrology 
Boreholes: Dec. 1, 2000 to May 
31, 2001 
H Q 
LB0203H2ODSTEH.001 [158351] Passive Monitoring Data 
Collected from 12 Hydrology 
Boreholes: June 1, 2001 through 
end of Heating Phase Jan. 14, 
2002 
H Q 
6.3.2.4 6.3.2.4-7 
LB980912332245.002 [105593] Gas Tracer Test and Estimated 
Porosity 
H Q 6.3.2.4 6.3.2.4-5 
6.3.2.4-6 
LB970500123142.003 [131500] Laboratory Saturation, Porosity, 
Bulk Density, Particle Density, 
Gravimetric Water Content Data 
from Dry Drilled and wet drilled 
Cores in the DST and SHT 
H Q 6.3.2.5 6.3.2.5-1 
6.3.2.5-2 
LL020502523142.020 [159105] Laboratory Measured Electrical 
Properties of the DST Samples 
as a Function of Saturation at 
95C 
H Q 6.3.2.5 
LL981109904242.072 [118959] Saturated and Dry Bulk Density 
Permitivity 
H Q 6.3.2.5 6.3.2.5-1 
6.3.2.5-2 
6.3.2.5-3 
SNF39012298002.002 [159114] Measurements of Displacement 
Data for the Drift Scale Test (with 
results from 11/1/1997 through 
5/31/1998) 
M Q 
SNF39012298002.006 [158419] MPBX and CDEX Displacement 
June 1998  August 1998 
M Q 
SNF39012298002.010 [158367] MPBX and CDEX Displacement 
September 1998  May 1999 
M Q 
SN0001F3912298.014 [153841] MPBX and CDEX Displacement 
June 1999  October 1999 
M Q 
SN0007F3912298.018 [158374] MPBX and CDEX Displacement 
November 1999  May 2000 
M Q 
SN0101F3912298.024 [158400] MPBX and CDEX Displacement 
June 2000  November 2000 
M Q 
SN0107F3912298.029 [158408] MPBX and CDEX Displacement 
December 2000  May 2001 
M Q 
SN0203F3912298.033 [158361] MPBX and CDEX Displacement 
June 2001  January 14, 2002 
M Q 
6.3.3.1 
6.3.3.2 
5.2-1 
5.2-3 
5.2-4 
6.3.3.1-2 
6.3.3.1-3 
6.3.3.1-4 
6.3.3.1-5 
6.3.3.1-6

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T4-8 September 2002 
Table 4-3. Input-DTNs for the Drift Scale Test1 (continued) 
Report Location 
Input-DTN [DIRS] Description Type2 Q 
Status Text Figures Tables 
SNF39012298002.004 [153837] MPBX and CDEX Displacement 
Corrected for Thermal Expansion 
November 9 1997  May 1998 
M Q 
SNF39012298002.008 [153839] MPBX and CDEX Displacement 
Corrected for Thermal Expansion 
June 1998  August 1998 
M Q 
SNF39012298002.012 [153840] MPBX and CDEX Displacement 
Corrected for Thermal Expansion 
September 1998  May 1999 
M Q 
SN0001F3912298.016 [153842] MPBX and CDEX Displacement 
Corrected for Thermal Expansion 
June 1999  October 1999 
M Q 
SN0007F3912298.020 [158388] MPBX and CDEX Displacement 
Corrected for Thermal Expansion 
November 1999  May 2000 
M Q 
SN0101F3912298.026 [158402] MPBX and CDEX Displacement 
Corrected for Thermal Expansion 
June 2000  November 2000 
M Q 
SN0107F3912298.031 [158413] MPBX and CDEX Displacement 
Corrected for Thermal Expansion 
December 2000  May 2001 
M Q 
SN0203F3912298.035 [158363] MPBX and CDEX Displacement 
Corrected for Thermal Expansion 
June 2001  January 14, 2002 
M Q 
6.3.3.1 
6.3.3.2 
5.2-1 
5.2-3 
5.2-4 
6.3.3.1-2 
6.3.3.1-3 
6.3.3.1-4 
6.3.3.1-5 
6.3.3.1-6 
6.3.3.6-5 
SNF38040197001.001 [159130] Strain-gage and Anchor 
Locations 
M Q 6.3.3.3 6.3.3.3-1 
SNF39012298002.003 [158417] Ground Support System Strain: 
November 9, 1997  May 1998 
M Q 
SNF39012298002.007 [158365] Ground Support System Strain: 
June 1998  August 1998 
M Q 
SNF39012298002.011 [158368] Ground Support System Strain: 
September 1998  May 1999 
M Q 
SN0001F3912298.015 [158372] Ground Support System Strain: 
June 1999  October 1999 
M Q 
SN0007F3912298.019 [158387] Ground Support System Strain: 
November 1999  May 2000 
M Q 
SN0101F3912298.025 [158401] Ground Support System Strain: 
June 2000  November 2000 
M Q 
SN0107F3912298.030 [158409] Ground Support System Strain: 
December 2000  May 2001 
M Q 
SN0203F3912298.034 [158362] Ground Support System Strain: 
June 2001  January 14, 2002 
M Q 
SNF39012298002.005 [158418] Ground Support System Strain 
Corrected for Thermal 
Expansion: November 9, 1997  
May 1998 
M Q 
SNF39012298002.009 [158366] Ground Support System Strain 
Corrected for Thermal 
Expansion: June 1998  August 
1998 
M Q 
6.3.3.3 6.3.3.3-2

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T4-9 September 2002 
Table 4-3. Input-DTNs for the Drift Scale Test1 (continued) 
Report Location 
Input-DTN [DIRS] Description Type2 Q 
Status Text Figures Tables 
SNF39012298002.013 [158369] Ground Support System Strain 
Corrected for Thermal 
Expansion: September 1998  
May 1999 
M Q 
SN0001F3912298.017 [158373] Ground Support System Strain 
Corrected for Thermal 
Expansion: June 1999  October 
1999 
M Q 
SN0007F3912298.021 [158391] Ground Support System Strain 
Corrected for Thermal 
Expansion: November 1999  
May 2000 
M Q 
SN0101F3912298.027 [158407] Ground Support System Strain 
Corrected for Thermal 
Expansion: June 2000  
November 2000 
M Q 
SN0107F3912298.032 [158414] Ground Support System Strain 
Corrected for Thermal 
Expansion: December 2000  
May 2001 
M Q 
SN0203F3912298.036 [158364] Ground Support System Strain 
Corrected for Thermal 
Expansion: June 2001  January 
14, 2002 
M Q 
6.3.3.3 6.3.3.3-2 
LB980120123142.007 [158352] Acoustic Emissions: Baseline 
and Heating 
M Q 
LB980420123142.004 [113717] Acoustic Emissions: Baseline 
and Heating 
M Q 
LB990630123142.004 [158360] Acoustic Emissions: Baseline 
and Heating 
M Q 
LB000121123142.005 [158339] Acoustic Emissions: Baseline 
and Heating 
M Q 
LB000718123142.005 [158343] Acoustic Emissions: Baseline 
and Heating 
M Q 
LB0101ACEMDST1.001 [158344] Acoustic Emissions: Baseline 
and Heating 
M Q 
LB0108ACEMDST5.001 [158437] Acoustic Emissions: Baseline 
and Heating 
M Q 
6.3.3.4 6.3.3.4-1 
6.3.3.4-2 
SNL23030598001.003 [158422] Creep Testing of Concrete Liner M Q 6.3.3.5 6.3.3.5-1 
SN020312210196.007 [158322] Laboratory Thermal Expansion M Q 6.3.3.5 6.3.3.5-1 
6.3.3.5-2 
SNL02100196001.001 [158420] Elastic Constants and Strength 
Properties 
M Q 6.3.3.5 6.3.3.5-3 
SNL23030598001.001 [158370] Elastic Constants and Strength of 
Concrete 
M Q 6.3.3.5 6.3.3.5-4 
6.3.3.5-5 
SN0011F3912298.022 [158392] Rock Mass Displacement 
Pressure Data Plate Load Test 
October 16-17 2000 
M Q 6.3.3.6 6.3.3.6-1 
SN0011F3912298.023 [158399] Rock Mass Displacement 
Pressure Data in Modulus 
October 16-17 2000 
M Q 6.3.3.6 6.3.3.6-2

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T4-10 September 2002 
Table 4-3. Input-DTNs for the Drift Scale Test1 (continued) 
Report Location 
Input-DTN [DIRS] Description Type2 Q 
Status Text Figures Tables 
GS970608314224.007 [158430] Rock Mass Rating and Rock 
Mass Quality 
M Q 
SNF32020196001.010 [158314] Rock Mass Quality M Q 
SNF32020196001.015 [158434] Rock Mass Quality M Q 
6.3.3.6 6.3.3.6-2 
6.3.3.6-3 
6.3.3.6-4 
MO0207AL5WATER.001 [159300] Water Sampling in Alcove 5 
(Results from 2/4/1997 through 
4/20/1999). 
C Q 
MO0101SEPFDDST.000 [153711] Field Measured Data of Water 
Samples from the Drift Scale 
Test 
C Q 
SN0203F3903102.001 [159133] Drift Scale Test Water Sampling 
(with Results from 4/17/2001 
through 1/14/2002) 
C Q 
6.3.4.1 6.3.4.1-1 
MO0005PORWATER.000 
[150930] 
Perm-Sample Pore Water Data C Q 
LL001100931031.008 [153288] Aqueous Chemistry of Water 
Sampled from Boreholes of the 
Drift Scale Test (DST) 
C Q 
LL001200231031.009 [153616] Aqueous Chemistry of Water 
Sampled from Boreholes of the 
Drift Scale Test (DST) 
C Non-Q3 
LL020302223142.015 [159134] Aqueous Geochemistry of DST 
Samples Collected from HYD 
Boreholes. 
C Q 
LL020405123142.019 [159307] Aqueous Geochemistry of 
Condensed Fluids Collected 
During Studies of Introduced 
Materials 
C Q 
6.3.4.1 6.3.4.1-2 
LB980420123142.005 [111471] Isotope Data for CO2 from Gas 
Samples Collected from DST: 
February 1998 
C Q 6.3.4.2 6.3.4.2-1 
6.3.4.2-3 
LB980715123142.003 [111472] Isotope Data for CO2 from Gas 
Samples Collected from DST: 
June 4, 1998 
C Q 
LB981016123142.004 [113278] Isotope Data for CO2 from Gas 
and Water Samples: June 1998 
to September 1998 
C Q 
LB990630123142.003 [111476] Isotope Data for CO2 from Gas 
and Water Samples: September 
1998 to May 1999. 
C Q 
LB000121123142.003 [146451] Isotope Data for CO2 Gas 
Samples Collected from the 
Hydrology Boreholes: August 9, 
1999 Through November 30, 
1999 
C Q 
LB000718123142.003 [158342] Isotope Data for CO2 Gas 
Samples Collected from the 
Hydrology Boreholes: April 18, 
2000 Through April 19, 2000. 
C Q 
6.3.4.2 6.3.4.2-1 
6.3.4.2-3

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T4-11 September 2002 
Table 4-3. Input-DTNs for the Drift Scale Test1 (continued) 
Report Location 
Input-DTN [DIRS] Description Type2 Q 
Status Text Figures Tables 
LB0102CO2DST98.001 [159306] Concentration and Isotope Data 
for CO2 and H20 from Gas 
Samples Collected from 
Hydrology Boreholes: May and 
August 1999, April 2000, January 
and April 2001 
C Q 
LB0108CO2DST05.001 [156888] Concentration and Isotope Data 
for CO2 and H20 from Gas 
Samples Collected from 
Hydrology Boreholes: May and 
August 1999, April 2000, January 
and April 2001 
C Q 
6.3.4.2 6.3.4.2-1 6.3.4.2-1 
6.3.4.2-2 
6.3.4.2-3 
LB0203CO2DSTEH.001 [158349] Concentration/Isotope Data for 
CO2/H20 from Gas Samples 
Collected from Hydrology 
Boreholes up to End of Heating 
C Q 
LB0206C14DSTEH.001 [159303] Carbon 14 Isotope Data from 
CO2 Gas Samples Collected from 
DST 
C Q 
6.3.4.2 6.3.4.2-1 
6.3.4.2-3 
LA9912SL831151.002 [146449] Percent Coverage By Fracture- 
Coating Minerals in Core ESFHD-
TEMP-2 
C Q 6.3.4.3 6.3.4.3-1 
LA0201SL831225.001 [158426] Chemical, Textural, and 
Mineralogical Characteristics of 
Sidewall Samples from the Drift 
Scale Test. 
C Q 
LA0009SL831151.001 [153485] Fracture Mineralogy of the ESF 
Single Heater Test Block, Alcove 
5 
C Q 
LA0201SL831225.001 [158426] Chemical, Textural, and 
Mineralogical Characteristics of 
Sidewall Samples from the Drift 
Scale Test. 
C Q 
6.3.4.3 
GS011108312322.008 [159136] Uranium Concentrations and 
234u/238u Activity Ratios 
Analyzed Between February 1, 
1999 and August 1, 2001 for 
Drift-Scale Heater Test Water 
Collected Between June 1998 
and April 2001, and Pore Water 
Collected Between March 1996 
and April 1999. 
C Q 6.3.4.4 6.3.4.4-1 
6.3.4.4-2 
GS011108312322.009 [159137] Strontium Isotope Ratios and 
Strontium Concentrations in 
Water Samples from the Drift 
Scale Test Analyzed from March 
16, 1999 to June 27, 2001. 
C Q 6.3.4.4 6.3.4.4-3 
SN0203F3903102.001 [159133] Drift Scale Test Water Sampling 
(With Results from 4/17/2001 
Through 1/14/2002) 
C Q 
LL020405123142.019 [159307] Aqueous Geochemistry of 
Condensed Fluids Collected 
During Studies of Introduced 
Materials. 
C Q 
6.3.4.5 6.3.4.5-1

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T4-12 September 2002 
Table 4-3. Input-DTNs for the Drift Scale Test1 (continued) 
Report Location 
Input-DTN [DIRS] Description Type2 Q 
Status Text Figures Tables 
LARO831422AQ97.002 [158431] DST Borehole Video Logging G Q 6.3.5.2 
NOTE: 1 DTNs LA9908FH6001WP.001 [158319], LA0111FH831151.002 [158317], LA0208FH831151.001 [159515], and 
LA0208FH831151.002 [159308] provide access via Records Processing Center (RPC) to all thermal and mechanical 
data collected in DST Data Collection System (original/electrical and converted/engineering units). These non-qualified 
DTNs also provides access (RPC) to pertinent supporting material such as scientific notebooks and calibration 
relationships. 
2 T=Thermal, H=Hydrological, M=Mechanical, C=Chemical, G=General/Miscellaneous 
3 This data set is classified as non-Q due to the disposition of a Deficiency Report. Hence, these data should only be 
used for corroborative purposes.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 5-1 September 2002 
5. ASSUMPTIONS 
As per Attachment 3-Item 5 of AP-SIII.9Q, assumptions apply to those activities associated with 
the scientific analyses of the Scientific Analysis Report. The scientific analyses for this report 
involve mainly restructuring, as needed, Input-DTNs (that presently reside on the TDMS) into 
more user-friendly Output-DTNs. These transformations of Input-DTNs to Output-DTNs in most 
instances consisted of straightforward reorganizing, reformatting, and/or graphic representation 
that did not invoke significant assumptions. But for a few groups of measurements, more 
extensive data reduction was needed to achieve the objective of converting the content of the 
Input-DTNs into Output-DTNs in a format that is more useful to the end-users. For these 
measurements, assumptions associated with the data reduction are discussed below. 
Discussions of the bases for the assumptions in this Scientific Analysis Report are grouped into 
two categories (Sections 5.1 and 5.2) in which each assumption is essentially identical and can 
be stated as follows: It is assumed that the significant reduction of measurements from the 
appropriate Input-DTNs to the Output-DTNs has been properly conducted. 
5.1 AIR-PERMEABILITY ANALYSIS 
Assumption: The development of air permeabilities (Output-DTN) from air-injection flow rates 
and pressure responses (Input DTNs) assumes air behaves as an ideal gas; a finite line source can 
represent a borehole injection interval; air flows are mainly through fractures; and air flows are 
governed by Darcys law. 
Basis: The following discussion pertains to measurements described in Sections 6.2.2.4 and 
6.3.2.4. Based on the detailed discussion below, further confirmation of this assumption is not 
required. 
During air-injection testing, local permeability is estimated from the steady-state pressure 
response to a constant-flux gas injection. An analytical solution for the steady-state pressure 
response of a constant flow-rate injection in a finite line source is applied to estimate gas 
permeability near the wellbore. The solution was adapted from the steady-state analytical 
solution for ellipsoidal flow of incompressible fluid from a finite line source (Hvorslev 1951 
[101868]) in an infinite medium (L/rw >> 1) and is as follows: 
SC 
f SC SC 
T P P L 
T 
r
L Q P 
k 
) ( 
ln 
2 
1 
2 
2 . 
.. 
. 
.. 
. 
. 
. 
. 
(Eq. 5.1-1) 
where:
k = permeability (m2) 
PSC = pressure at standard conditions(1.013 x 105 Pa) 
QSC = flowrate at standard conditions(m3/s) 
. = dynamic viscosity of air (1.81 x 10-5 Pa  s at 20C)

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 5-2 September 2002 
L = length of air injection zone (m) 
rw = radius of borehole (m) 
Tf = temperature of formation (o K) 
P2 = steady state pressure (Pa) 
P1 = ambient pressure (Pa) 
TSC = temperature at standard conditions (293.16 K) 
Equation 5.1-1 is discussed in Section 8.1.1.1 of the Single Heater Test Final Report (CRWMS 
M&O 1999 [129261]). It assumes a finite length and finite radius cylindrical injection source, 
surrounded by a homogeneous medium of infinite extent. Gas is assumed to be ideally 
compressible. Alternative conceptualizations of the flow field geometry are possible and yield 
estimates of permeability that may vary by a factor of two or three from the above solution. 
For Equation 5.1-1 to be valid in a fractured media, fractures must be dense and form an 
effective continuum at the scale at which the test is performed. This assumes that the fractures 
play the role of interconnected pores in a porous media and do not act as discrete features. In 
cases where the assumptions of an effective continuum are not valid, Equation 5.1-1 still yields a 
useful quantitative value that reflects the rock-mass gas injectivity. Here injectivity is defined as 
a measure of the formations ability to permit gas flow. Changes in permeability (or formation 
injectivity) during heating and cooling are indicative of changes in fracture liquid saturation, or 
opening and closing of fractures from THM coupling. As fracture saturation increases or 
fractures close, gas injectivity decreases. Similarly a decrease in fracture liquid saturation or 
fracture opening will lead to an increase in gas injectivity. For both the SHT and DST, changes 
in permeability will be reported as a ratio of measured permeability to the baseline value, 
established prior to the start of heating. 
The user of the permeability estimates should understand the limitations of a continuum model in 
interpreting measurements performed in a heterogeneous formation, such as the Topopah Spring 
middle nonlithophysal tuff. An example of model limitations is a block of rock that contains only 
a single transmissive feature. An injection test can be performed with a straddle packer that spans 
length L of formation that includes this single transmissive feature, leading to an estimate of 
permeability, k. If a shorter injection interval is tested, for example L/10, where this same single 
transmissive feature is straddled, the estimate for the formation permeability will yield a value of 
k*ln(10). In a case such as this, it is erroneous to assume that Equation 5.2-1 will provide an 
accurate estimate of formation permeability. However, by repeatedly performing measurements 
using the same testing configuration, changes in permeability can be tracked as thermal testing 
proceeds. For both the SHT and the DST, the air-permeability test intervals were kept fixed 
between quarterly air-injection tests, excluding the DST zones that varied as a result of 
pneumatic-packer failures. 
5.2 MULTI-POINT BOREHOLE EXTENSOMETER (MPBX) DISPLACEMENTS AND 
STRAIN ANALYSIS 
Assumption: It is assumed that noisy/erratic data can be eliminated on the basis of smoothing.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 5-3 September 2002 
Basis: The following discussion pertains to measurements described in Section 6.3.3.1. Based on 
the detailed discussion below, further confirmation of this assumption is not required. 
The MPBX and strain data are meant to provide a measure of rock deformation caused by 
thermal expansion and mechanical stresses in the rock surrounding the Heated Drift. The MPBX 
and strain data were expected to have a smooth appearance, with any discontinuities likely 
relating to sudden movements along fractures. However, many of the data traces exhibit noise 
which makes the data difficult to read and interpret. 
In general, there are two types of noise that have been identified in the MPBX data. One type is 
identified by either a wildly oscillating mean value with no discernable pattern, or by values that 
go outside the expected range of displacement values. These data values are understood to be 
bad data, where the gage is experiencing either temporary or permanent incorrect readings. 
The second type is identified by data that has a discernable pattern (typically, the pattern would 
follow a curve fit to the top edge of the data on a displacement-versus-time curve), and the 
data oscillates at values below the predominant curve. A closer examination of the individual 
MPBXs revealed the following generalizations: 
. Displacement and temperature data in boreholes collared in the crown (MPBXs 3-5, 7- 
9, 11-13) had substantial oscillations with this pattern. 
. Temperature data in boreholes collared in invert (MPBXs 6, 10, 14) had almost no 
unusual oscillations. 
This examination of the MPBX data noted a peculiar unidirectional nature to the oscillations in 
the temperature data: when the mean temperature was below the boiling point (96C), the 
oscillations were upward to a ceiling of 96C; similarly, for mean temperatures above 96C, the 
oscillations were downward to a floor of 96C. Furthermore, it was noted that these oscillations 
were occurring in the MPBXs collared in the crown (3-5, 7-9, 11-13), and not in those collared in 
the invert (6, 10, 14). 
Apparently, the oscillations in the displacement data are being affected by temperature 
oscillations in the MPBX borehole, caused by water recirculation within the borehole. Water 
vapor enters the borehole above the boiling isotherm. (This is possible, even though the MPBX 
boreholes were sealed with an aluminum liner coated with Teflon, because of gaps in the liner 
for anchor placement.) The thermocouples (TCs) at locations far above the collar experience 
water condensation, which raises temperatures toward the ceiling at 96C. The liquid water then 
falls down the borehole; there are sufficient gaps around the anchors for liquid water to pass 
through. Eventually, this water vaporizes in the regions closer to the Heated Drift, causing 
temperatures there to drop to the 96C floor. The recirculating water, which alternately boils, 
rises, condenses, and falls in a cyclic fashion in the borehole, causes the Invar connecting rods to 
shrink/expand, resulting in real changes in voltages in the linear variable displacement 
transducers (LVDTs), which correspond to the temperature extremes. 
The changing temperatures at the MPBX head also affect the calibration constants of the LVDTs 
based on the temperature at the collar. It is thought that the surrounding rock mass is negligibly 
affected by these temperature oscillations, and thus the oscillating MPBX measurements do not

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 5-4 September 2002 
represent the actual rock behavior. To use the MPBX data to validate thermal-mechanical 
models, or to use them to derive rock-mass thermal-mechanical properties, the true rock-mass 
behavior must somehow be extracted from the noisy data. It is this requirement that led the 
thermal test team to attempt to smooth the MPBX data. 
There are several issues that make a scientifically based algorithm for smoothing the MPBX data 
a complex matter: the contraction/expansion of the Invar rods, the effect of temperature on the 
LVDT, the need to capture true fracture deformation events, and other causes of unlikely data 
values. Therefore, to attempt to provide smooth data for use in validating thermal-mechanical 
models, a simplified approach using technical judgment was used. Under this approach, the 
acquired MPBX measurements from the LVDTs, as calculated by the Data Collection System, 
were corrected for the thermal expansion of the Invar connecting rods in essentially the same 
manner as the developed MPBX data that are regularly submitted to the TDMS. The acquired 
MPBX and temperature data, and the corrected MPBX data, were listed in an Excel spreadsheet, 
one for each MPBX. Then, several steps were taken to smooth the data. First, based on the 
technical judgment of the analyst, sections of data that were considered unusable were deleted. 
Typically, these data were either the results of a problem with the gage itself: failure, erratic 
voltage readings, etc. Then, other sections of noisy data were identified using a 0.3 mm 
difference between values at six-hour intervals. If the behavior of the identified data matched the 
assumed behavior caused by the recirculating water, then that range of values was discarded. 
Figures 5.2-15.2-4 show the following steps in this process for MPBX9: original thermally 
corrected displacement data, temperature data, and smoothed data using this method. 
While discarding data, it was important to retain information that may represent other physical 
processes, such as a sudden permanent shift that may indicate fracture slippage or closure. This 
procedure is somewhat subjective, but it does allow for a reduction of the MPBX data to a 
reasonable and functional format. 
This procedure for smoothing the MPBX data was used for MPBX data through 7/31/2000 (i.e., 
through 971 days of heating). For this report, an additional step was takenthe maximum (or 
minimum, where applicable) value for consecutive ten-day windows was taken from the data, to 
provide a user-friendly format for modeling purposes. Figure 5.2-4 shows the final smooth data 
for MPBX9; this format will be used for the rest of this report. The Output-DTN for all smoothed 
DST MPBX data for the heating phase of the DST is provided in Table 6.3-1. 
The strain data (measured on the surface of the cast-in-place concrete liner) was also smoothed 
but in a less complex manner than applied to the MPBX displacements. The noisy/erratic strain 
data was usually smoothed by retaining the maximum value, but, in some cases, the minimum 
value was selected. The Output-DTN for all smoothed DST strain data for the DST heating phase 
is provided in Table 6.3-1.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F5-1 September 2002 
Figure 5.2-1. Original Thermally-Corrected Displacement Data for DST Borehole 156 (MPBX9) 
Figure 5.2-2. Temperature Data for DST Borehole 156 (MPBX9)

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F5-2 September 2002 
Figure 5.2-3. Intermediate Smoothed Displacement Data for DST Borehole 156 (MPBX9) 
Figure 5.2-4. Final Smoothed Displacement Data for DST Borehole 156 (MPBX9)

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.1-1 September 2002 
6. DISCUSSION OF MEASUREMENTS 
Scientific analysis is defined in Section 3.13 of AP-SIII.9Q as a study that investigates scientific 
phenomena or parameters. The scientific phenomena investigated are the thermal-hydrologicalmechanical-
chemical behavior measured in each of the three thermal tests (LBT, SHT, and 
DST). Parameters in this report reflect laboratory and field measurements that characterized the 
respective test blocks for each of the three thermal tests. As discussed in Section 1, data collected 
within the YMP Thermal Testing Program must be readily usable to end users such as those 
representing the Performance Assessment Project, Repository Design Project, and Engineered 
System Sub-Project. Since either detailed level 3 and level 4 reports exist or the measurements 
are straightforward, only brief discussions are provided for each data set. These brief discussions 
for different data sets are intended to impart a clear sense of applicability of data, so that end 
users will be able to use and interpret these data properly within the context of measurement 
uncertainty. This approach also keeps the report to a manageable size, an important consideration 
since it encompasses nearly all measurements for three long-term thermal tests. As appropriate, 
thermal testing data currently residing in the TDMS have been reorganized and reformatted from 
cumbersome, often not user-friendly Input-DTNs into a new set of Output-DTNs. These Output- 
DTNs provide data structure including graphical displays and comprehensive spreadsheets. In 
some cases, there was no need to reformat or restructure Input-DTNs so they remained 
unchanged. 
Discussion of the thermal testing measurements in this report is organized first under the heading 
of the three tests: LBT, SHT, and DST; and then under the four processes: thermal (T), 
hydrological (H), mechanical (M), and chemical (C). Miscellaneous measurements and 
observations are also discussed. Although the list of measurement types is comprehensive, it is 
neither practical (because of finite report length) nor necessary to thoroughly discuss all data 
sets. For example, the DST-measured temperatures come from nearly 2,700 thermal sensors 
distributed throughout the test block and collected on an hourly basis, resulting in approximately 
100 million measurements. Therefore, as appropriate for each measurement type, only a 
representative discussion of the test data behavior is presented. Readers are referred to userfriendly 
Output-DTNs for comprehensive data sets that include complementary graphics. 
The following discussions concerning the 12 basic measurement groups (three thermal tests and 
four processes) are dictated by their respective data characteristics. In general, discussions of 
thermal and mechanical measurements tend to be comparatively short, although the respective 
Output-DTNs contain comparatively large amounts of data. This condition reflects the inherent 
straightforwardness of temperature and displacement measurements that are recorded frequently 
(hourly) on a data acquisition system. Conversely, discussions of hydrological and chemical 
measurements tend to be lengthier, while their Output-DTNs are comparatively small. The 
smaller output data sets result from measurements collected comparatively infrequently (monthly 
or longer) on a nonintegrated data acquisition system. The more lengthy discussion in the 
chemical measurements sections relate to sampling procedures that have much relevance to the 
data collected. Also, in certain hydrological measurements, detailed explanations are needed for 
the complex reduction that occurs as the data are transformed from Input-DTNs to more useful 
and functional Output-DTNs.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.1-2 September 2002 
In addition, uncertainty associated with most measurements is discussed. These discussions of 
uncertainty are restricted to actual measurements and data reduction. If quantifiable uncertainties 
were cited, then either references to manufacturers specifications were provided or they were 
referred to as estimates. Standard error analyses (mean and standard deviation) were provided 
for applicable measurements such as repetitive measurements of laboratory or field parameters. 
Test measurements of a response for a specific location and time are not applicable for standard 
error analyses. Additional information on measurement uncertainties can be located via 
directions in DTNs cited in the first footnote of Tables 4-1, 4-2, and 4-3. This information, 
among other things, provides detailed discussions of scientific notebooks and calibration 
relationships relevant to uncertainties of thermal testing measurements. The approach taken 
provides sufficient discussion of uncertainties for end-users of thermal testing measurements 
such as process modelers. In cases where uncertainty is redundant among two or all three thermal 
tests, the initial discussion of uncertainty is referenced. Uncertainty related to modeling and 
analyses between measured and simulated data will be discussed in Model Reports related to TH, 
THC, and THM process models. Also included in this report are summaries of three white papers 
involving in-depth investigations of unexpected or unusual DST behavior not uncommon in 
large-scale, long-term field testing. They are found in Sections 6.3.2.6, 6.3.3.7, and 6.3.4.5. 
6.1 LARGE BLOCK TEST (LBT) 
The LBT is a controlled test to provide data for a better understanding of the coupled thermalhydrologic-
mechanical-chemical processes in a heated unsaturated rock mass. The LBT was 
conducted at the outcrop of the middle nonlithophysal unit of the Topopah Spring tuff (Tptpmn) 
at Fran Ridge, Nevada. A 3 . 3 . 4.5 m high column of the rock mass was isolated from the 
outcrop at the eastern slope of Fran Ridge (See Figure 6.1-1). The base of the column is still 
connected to the ground. The block was heated from February 28, 1997, to March 10, 1998. A 
natural cooling phase started on March 10, 1998, until the termination of the data acquisition on 
September 30, 1998. 
Tables 4-1 and 6.1-1 provide a listing of LBT Input-DTNs and Output-DTNs, respectively. The 
Output-DTNs provide either test measurements or parameter values and related graphics and 
coordinates of the sensors used in the test measurements. Table 4-1 also provides the Q-status of 
the measurements, as well as the text, figures, and tables in this report where Input-DTNs are 
cited. 
For ease of thermal modeling, a one-dimensional thermal field (having thermal gradient 
dependent only on the z direction) within the block was created by line heaters used to simulate a 
planar heat source located at a height of approximately one-third of the total height of the block 
(1.75 m from the base of the block). A heat exchanger system was used to maintain a constant 
temperature, about 60.C, on the top surface of the block. This system consisted of an aluminum 
plate fitted with heating/cooling coils mounted on the top of the block. This plate was connected 
to a heat exchanger to allow thermal control of the top surface. 
To achieve a one-dimensional thermal-hydrological process in the z direction, a layer of roomtemperature 
vulcanized (RTV) rubber and Viton were installed on the block sides to minimize 
moisture flux. Three layers of thermal-insulation materials were installed on the outside of the

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.1-3 September 2002 
moisture barrier. All of the sensor boreholes were sealed by cement grout, packers, or a RTV/ 
Teflon membrane. 
Sensors in the block measured heater power, temperature, moisture content, mechanical 
deformations, thermal conductivity and diffusivity, relative humidity, and gas pressure. Air 
permeability was measured before the heating and at the end of the heating phase. Figures 6.1-2 
to 6.1-5 show the sensor boreholes in the top and sides of the block. There are no sensor 
boreholes in the south side of the block. The assessment of the chemical process in the block was 
achieved by comparing the mineralogical changes in the core samples obtained before and after 
the test. Small blocks of the rock were obtained from the proximity of the large block for 
conducting laboratory tests to determine hydrologic and mechanical properties. Microbial 
survivability and migration were also investigated. These measurements and observations will be 
described in greater detail in the following subsections. Table 6.1-2 shows the XYZ coordinates 
of the collar and bottom of all of the boreholes in the LBT. 
The LBT data collection system (DCS) recorded thermal and mechanical data hourly for the 
most part. The acquired data consists of both original (measured electronic values) and converted 
(engineering units). Two packages of data were submitted to the Records Processing Center 
(RPC) and corresponding DTNs (LA0106FH831151.002 [158230] and LA0106FH831151.003 
[158229]) were also obtained. These DCS-DTNs are considered non-qualified because they are 
stored in the RPC but they do identify compact discs of identical qualified data that are 
distributed to the Thermal Test Team. These DCS-DTNs also identify scientific notebooks (SNs) 
that provide details of LBT measurements including calibration information. These DCS-DTNs 
are reduced and re-structured and periodically submitted to the TDMS resulting in many of the 
Input-DTNs introduced below and listed in Table 4-1. As discussed in Sections 1 and the 
introduction to Section 6, these Input-DTNs are further refined, reduced, and restructured before 
being resubmitted to the TDMS as Output-DTNs (see Table 6.1-1). In summary, the end user has 
access to three levels of data for LBT thermal, mechanical measurements: DCS-DTNs, Input- 
DTNs, and Output-DTNs. For most future applications, it is anticipated that end users will access 
the Output-DTNs because they are more user friendly. 
6.1.1 LBT Thermal Measurements 
The block was heated by electrical heaters in the five heater boreholes, which formed a 
horizontal plane 2.74 m below the block top. The heater boreholes are EH1 to EH5 as shown in 
Figure 6.1-4. The temperature was measured in boreholes within the block as well as on the 
block surfaces. The temperature boreholes within the block are shown as TT1 and TT2 in Figure 
6.1-2, NT1 to NT4 in Figure 6.1-3, and WT1 to WT3 in Figure 6.1-5. In situ thermal 
conductivity [k] and diffusivity [.] were measured by using Rapid Evaluation of K and Alpha 
(REKA) probes in three boreholes. The REKA boreholes are TR1 in Figure 6.1-2 and WR1 and 
WR2 in Figure 6.1-5. The following sections will present the heater power, temperature, and 
thermal conductivity and diffusivity of the block. 
A detailed discussion of the LBT thermal measurements is provided in Section 5 of the Large 
Block Test Final Report (Lin et al. 2001 [159069]). Input-DTNs and Output-DTNs for thermal 
measurements are provided in Tables 4-1 and 6.1-1, respectively.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.1-4 September 2002 
6.1.1.1 Heater Power 
6.1.1.1.1 Results: Heater Power 
The heater in each of the five heater boreholes (EH1 to EH5 as in Figure 6.1-4) was energized to 
450 W on February 28, 1997. The power output of one of those heaters as a function of time is 
shown in Figure 6.1.1.1-1, as an example. The power output of the other heaters was similar to 
this one. Spikes in this figure were due to short-duration power outages, which did not affect the 
test significantly. The data gaps at 133 to 136 days and at 280 to 283 days were caused by 
malfunction of the data acquisition unit. The power was maintained approximately constant, at 
about 450 W, until about Day 222, when the power was reduced to reach a near steady-state 
temperature in the block. The temperature at TT1-14 was maintained fairly constant at about 
135.C (see Figure 6.1.1.2-1) for the remainder of the test. Toward the end of the test, the power 
had to be increased back to nearly 450 W to maintain the 135.C temperature in the test block. 
This was probably caused by a cooler ambient temperature at that time. The heater power data 
are in the Technical Data Management System (TDMS) under DTN: LL980918904244.074 
[135872]. 
6.1.1.1.2 Measurement Uncertainty: Heater Power 
The accuracy of the watt transducers used in measuring the heater power is conservatively 
estimated to be less than 2% at 500 W full span. This degree of uncertainty is considered typical. 
The uncertainty is less than the power fluctuations associated with routine oscillations of power 
supply from the local utility as shown in Figure 6.1.1.1-1. 
6.1.1.2 Temperatures 
The temperature measurements included the spatial and temporal variation of the temperature in 
the block and the thermal gradient on the block surfaces. Resistance temperature devices (RTDs) 
were used to measure temperatures in the block and on the block surface. Within the block, 
temperature was measured in nine RTD boreholes and five heater boreholes: TT1 and TT2, NT1 
to NT4, EH1 to EH5, and WT1 to WT3, as shown in Figures 6.1-2 to 6.1-5, respectively. The 
RTD boreholes were instrumented with RTDs at 20 cm spacing. This was accomplished by 
grouting a bundle of RTDs with cement in each of the temperature boreholes. The RTD 
numbering always started from the bottom of a borehole. For example, TT1-1 is the RTD at the 
bottom of the vertical RTD borehole TT1, and NT1-14 is the RTD near the collar of the 
horizontal RTD borehole NT1, which was drilled from the north face of the block to a distance 
of about 30 cm from the south face of the block. In addition, five RTDs were placed in a thinwalled 
stainless-steel tube to test the feasibility of their being calibrated or replaced during the 
test. The stainless-steel tube was grouted along with the RTD bundle in-borehole TT1. Three 
RTDs were placed in each of the five heater boreholes approximately 0.6, 1.5, and 2.4 m from 
the collar. The thermal gradient to determine heat flux out of the block across the block surface 
was measured by a pair of RTDs on both sides of a 1.2 cm thick UltratempTM insulation panel. 
UltratempTM panels were mounted in zones on the four vertical faces of the block, on the outside 
of the Viton sheet. Temperature measurements on the top of the block were performed to verify 
that the heat exchanger controlled the top temperature at about 60.C during the test.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.1-5 September 2002 
For the discussion of the temperatures within the block during the test, only the temperature 
measured in the grouted boreholes will be used. The entire set of the temperature data is 
available in the TDMS under the DTN: LL980918904244.074 [135872]. 
6.1.1.2.1 Results: Temperatures 
The spatial distribution of the temperature in the LBT shows that the block was heated nearly 
unidirectionally in the z direction. The temperature in the two vertical RTD boreholes will be 
used to illustrate the temperature history in the block during the test. Figures 6.1.1.2-1 and 
6.1.1.2-2 show the temperature history at RTDs TT1-14 and TT2-14, respectively. TT1-14 and 
TT2-14 are at 5 and 10 cm below the heater plane, respectively. The location of boreholes TT1 
and TT2 can be found in Figure 6.1-2. The temperatures at TT1-14 are about 10.C greater than 
those at TT2-14, mainly because TT1-14 is about 5 cm closer to the heater plane than TT2-14. 
All of the sharp drops in temperature that occurred before 100 days since heating are related to 
power outages. TT1-14 represents the highest measured temperature in the rock of the LBT. 
As shown in Figure 6.1.1.2-1, the temperature at TT1-14 increased rapidly with time at the early 
stages of the heating. The temperature increased mainly from heat conduction. Rate of increase 
for the temperature decreased with time, mainly because of the decrease in thermal gradient at 
the RTD location as the thermal front expanded with time. When the temperature reached the 
boiling point of water, which is about 96.C at the elevation of Fran Ridge, the rate of 
temperature increase was significantly decreased. This decrease was caused by consumption of 
energy in the vaporization of the pore water in the rock. During the 20-day period between Day 
30 and Day 50, the temperature at TT1-14 increased from about 96.C to about 98.C. After Day 
50, the temperature at TT1-14 increased faster with time, indicating that most of the pore water 
had vaporized. Then at Day 105 (June 13, 1997) the temperature dropped to near the boiling 
point of water. This is the onset of the first of the two thermal-hydrological (TH) events. The 
second TH event occurred at Day 186 (September 2, 1997). The temperature fluctuations in 
those TH events indicated condensate refluxing. On Day 220 (October 6, 1997), the heater power 
started to ramp down to keep the TT1-14 temperature at approximately 137.C. The heaters were 
turned off on March 10, 1998, to start a natural cooling phase. The data acquisition was 
terminated on September 30, 1998. 
Figure 6.1.1.2-2 shows a temperature history at TT2-14 similar to that of TT1-14. The 
temperature at TT2-14 remained at 97.4.C for about 37 days (Day 75Day 112). Then the 
temperature increased to, and remained at, about 99.C for 16 days. Because the temperature at 
TT2-14 was at the boiling point of water when the first TH event occurred, the temperature at 
TT2-14 was not affected by that event. The rest of the temperature history at TT2-14 was very 
similar to that at TT1-14. 
6.1.1.2.2 Measurement Uncertainty: Temperatures 
The accuracy of the RTD is within 0.3oC (Section 5.1 of Single Heater Test Status Report 
(CRWMS M&O 1997 [101540])). With consideration of other factors, such as the location of the 
RTDs, the accuracy of the measured temperature in the LBT is estimated to be within 1.5.C. The 
RTD bundles were grouted in the boreholes; therefore, some of the RTDs may not have had 
direct contact with the borehole wall.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.1-6 September 2002 
Additional uncertainty may be introduced into the heat flux calculation. The heat flux of a region 
is represented only by the measurement at one point. The thermal conductivity of the 
Ultratemp. sheet, which is given by the manufacturer, and the measured thermal gradient were 
used to calculate the heat flux. No attempt was made to assess the variation of the insulation 
property and any effect of the field operation on the insulation effectiveness. 
6.1.2 LBT Hydrological Measurements 
The hydrologic measurements presented in this section include the field-measured moisture 
content, gas pressure, relative humidity, air permeability; and the laboratory-determined 
hydrologic parameters. The moisture content in the block was determined by electrical resistance 
tomography (ERT) and neutron logging. Neutron logging provides accurate determination of the 
moisture content within about a 10 cm radius distance from a borehole. The ERT provides 2-D 
distribution of the moisture content on a larger scale with less accuracy. The two methods were 
used to complement each other. Neutron logging was conducted periodically in 15 neutron 
boreholes: TN1-TN5 (Figure 6.1-2), NN1-NN6 (Figure 6.1-3), and WN1-WN4 (Figure 6.1-5). 
ERT electrodes were mounted in the vertical ERT borehole near the center of the block top and 
on the block sides. ERT was also periodically conducted on the large block periodically. Gas 
pressure and relative humidity were monitored in the four hydrologic boreholes: TH1 (Figure 
6.1-2), NH1 (Figure 6.1-3) and WH1-WH2 (Figure 6.1-5). Air permeability was measured in the 
hydrologic borehole TH1 before the block was cut, before the heating started, and at the end of 
the heating phase. Cross-borehole permeability between some of the boreholes was also 
measured before heating. 
Small blocks of the rock were collected in the proximity of the large block for laboratory tests of 
parameters. These include density, porosity, water permeability, moisture-retention curves, and 
fracture flow and matrix-imbibition visualization using X-ray radiography. 
A detailed discussion of the LBT hydrological measurements is provided in Section 6 of the 
Large Block Test Final Report (Lin et al. 2001 [159069]). Input-DTNs and Output-DTNs for 
hydrological measurements are provided in Tables 4-1 and 6.1-1, respectively. 
6.1.2.1 Electrical Resistance Tomography (ERT) 
ERT is a geophysical imaging technique that can be used to map subsurface resistivity (Daily 
and Owen 1991 [159126]; Lin et al. 2001 [159069], pp. 6-3 and 6-6). The ERT measurements 
consisted of a series of voltage and current measurements from buried electrodes, using an 
automated data collection system. The data were then processed to produce ERT tomograms. 
The images of resistivity change can be used, along with the measured temperature field and 
what is known of initial conditions in the rock mass, to estimate moisture change during heating. 
ERT electrodes were placed at approximately 0.3 m spacing in horizontal and vertical grooves 
on all four sides of the block, as shown in Figures 6.1.2.1-1 and 6.1-4 and along bore ERT 
(Figure 6.1-2). This arrangement of electrodes allowed imaging of two intersecting perpendicular 
vertical planes and tow parallel horizontal planes, about 1.25 m above and below the horizontal 
heater plane.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.1-7 September 2002 
The ERT tomograms can be found in the TDMS under the DTN: LL980913304244.072 
[145385] and LL981001604244.079 [158261]. Some of the resistivity images reconstructed late 
in the experiment (and the moisture changes inferred from them) are questionable because of the 
sparse data. As the rock mass dehydrated, the contact impedance between the electrodes and the 
rock increased dramatically, and data quality declined. Having fewer usable data results in a 
poorly constrained reconstruction that might look smeared or washed out. This is particularly 
noticeable in the vertical planes beginning early in 1998. Even though the test lasted until the end 
of September 1998, only the images up to March 19, 1998, are valid. 
6.1.2.1.1 Data Processing 
Section 6.1.2.1 of the Large Block Test Final Report (Lin et al. 2001 [159069]) provides detailed 
descriptions of the ERT methodology and data reduction procedures. Some of the important 
features of the 2-D algorithm used for ERT are briefly described. The algorithm (LaBrecque et 
al. 1996 [159047]) solves both the forward and inverse problems to find the smoothest resistivity 
model that fits the field data to a prescribed tolerance. Resistivity values assigned in this way to 
each pixel in the mesh constitute the ERT tomograms. Although the mesh is of a large region 
around the electrode arrays, only the region inside the ERT electrode array is used in the 
calculations of moisture content, because the region outside the array is poorly constrained by 
the data. 
The ratio of the measured electrical resistivity data during the test (both the heating phase and the 
cooling phase) to that of the pre-heating phase is chosen to represent the changes in the rock's 
electrical resistivity. This was done pixel by pixel within the image plane. This approach tends to 
reduce the effects of anomalies that do not satisfy the 2-D assumptions of the resistivity model 
because the 3-D effects tend to cancel in the ratio, since they are contained in both pre-heating 
and heating/cooling data. 
Resistivity of the rock is influenced by changes in moisture content, porosity, cation exchange 
capacity, solutes in the pore water, and temperature. Moisture content and temperature effects are 
expected to be most significant. An increase in temperature or moisture causes a resistivity 
decrease. However, there may be regions where the increasing temperature and decreasing porewater 
resistivity were opposed by the rock mass drying, which increases the resistivity. Our goal 
in this section is to use the images of resistivity change along with the measured temperature to 
estimate moisture change during the test. See Section 6.1.2.1.2 of the Large Block Test Final 
Report (Lin et al. 2001 [159069]) for a detailed description of how the changes in moisture 
content were calculated from the resistivity changes. 
Waxman and Thomas (1974 [101736]) describe a model for electrical conduction in partially 
saturated shaly sands typical of oil reservoirs (intended for oil field data) that accounts for 
conduction through the bulk pore water as well as conduction through the electrical double layer 
near the pore surface. This model can predict temperature dependence of the resistivity, but 
several of the model parameters must be empirically determined and are not available for tuff. 
Roberts and Lin (1997 [101710]) suggest that the Waxman model provides reasonably good 
estimates of resistivity for saturations greater than 20%. Waxman-Thomas model 1 converts the 
electrical resistivity changes to saturation changes, assuming that the primary pathway of

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.1-8 September 2002 
electrical current is through the water in the open pore space; Waxman-Thomas model 2 assumes 
that the primary pathway is through the double layer. 
Changes in saturation are estimated by using both models 1 and 2 (Waxman and Thomas 1974 
[101736]). This approach should provide bounds to the domain of possible saturations that may 
be present. However, if the cation exchange capacity, porosity, or water resistivity varies 
significantly across the ERT image plane, it is possible that model 1 results would be more 
accurate. In fact, we believe that model 1 is more representative of the rock mass for two 
reasons. First, the saturation estimates based on this model are in better agreement with those of 
the neutron log where those data are available. Second, model 2 occasionally predicts a 
saturation greater than 1, which, of course, is nonphysical. For that reason, only the saturation 
change tomograms of model 1 are presented in DTN: LL980913304244.072 [159109]. 
6.1.2.1.2 Results: ERT 
Figure 6.1.2.1-2 shows the saturation ratios (defined as current moisture content to pre-heating 
initial moisture content) in the two horizontal planes. Blank spaces indicate data sets that did not 
converge. The changes in moisture content initially are very small and increase in magnitude and 
extent as the test proceeds. Both horizontal imaging planes are 1.37 m from the heater plane; 
therefore, no significant drying in these planes is expected. Notice, however, that there are some 
asymmetries between the two planes. Through June 25, 1997 (117 days into heating), the upper 
plane (above the heater elevation) shows significantly less change from initial conditions than 
the lower plane. This asymmetry possibly resulted from heterogeneities in the block. 
Drying started to appear as early as May 22, 1997, in the lower plane. The anomalies were 
localized and linear in shape. Clearly, this drying is a result of the high temperatures, but the 
effects recorded in these images appear different above and below the heater plane. Above the 
heater, drying appears later and appears to form anomalies with rounded outlines. The linear 
shape may be caused by the matrix drying around a planar fracture that cuts through the image 
plane. Other anomalies of dehydration occur in both planes; some are quite prominent and some 
are minor. They all support the notion that the dehydration front is steadily advancing from the 
heater plane into both image planes, but that the process is affected by rockmass heterogeneities. 
Figure 6.1.2.1-3 shows the changes in the moisture content in the two vertical planes. As 
expected, the most obvious feature is the drying zone surrounding the heaters. Although drying is 
not clearly associated with the heaters until May 22, 1997 (about 83 days into heating), once 
formed, the drying zone is the dominant feature in either image plane all the way through the last 
data of cool-down (March 19, 1998). This large dry zone around the heater persists until the late 
heating phase in February 1998, when it breaks up, apparently because of excessive impedence 
associated with drying. 
Once formed, the heater dry zone is not smooth and planar, reflecting the heater geometry. 
Instead, it is very irregular in shape, with many appendages. There is also a tendency for the dry 
zone to be relatively flat on top and bottom early in the test, but convex on top and concave on 
the bottom late in the test. The asymmetry may be attributed to rock heterogeneities arising from 
fractures, though no convincing correlation is found between these features in the ERT images to 
the major fractures mapped in the block.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.1-9 September 2002 
6.1.2.1.3 Measurement Uncertainty: ERT 
Geophysical methods, including ERT, are intended to give qualitative estimates of drying and 
wetting. The ERT image represents integration of the saturation distribution over a relatively 
large area, and is therefore bound to be less accurate than neutron logging. There are many 
factors that affect the uncertainty of the ERT results: 
. The measurements of electrical voltage and current in the field are accurate, relative to 
other factors. 
. Measured temperatures within the image region are used for the ERT data reduction. 
Although the temperature can be measured very accurately at the RTD locations, 
interpolations are necessary to provide a 2-D temperature field suitable for the ERT. 
The interpolation will introduce uncertainty in the temperature field, especially with 
significant heterogeneity in the rock mass. 
. The current ERT data reduction does not directly consider the cation exchange capacity 
of the rock. The cation exchange capacity is indirectly considered when the laboratory 
measured relationship among the electrical resistivity, water saturation, and temperature 
is used to check Waxman-Thomas model of electrical resistivity and water saturation, 
which was developed for the case of shale sands. The validity of this model for welded 
tuff has been only partially checked by the laboratory data of welded tuff (Roberts and 
Lin 1997 [101710]). 
. The laboratory resistivity data of welded tuff indicate that the Waxman-Thomas model 
tends to overpredict dryness for saturations less than 20%. 
. The inversion algorithm used to reconstruct the tomographs smooths the data. 
Therefore, the structures observed are smeared versions of the true target. 
. The effect of the thermal fracturing on the electrical resistivity was not considered by 
the Waxman-Thomas model. 
. The resistivity ratios were calculated using a 2-D algorithm; natural heterogeneities 
such as fractures tend to be 3-D. Changes in resistivity occurring along fractures may 
be distorted by use of the 2-D algorithm. 
. Metallic sensors in the block may reduce sensitivity to resistivity changes occurring in 
the block. 
. The Waxman-Thomas models do not account for changes in water resistivity caused by 
rock/water chemical interactions. If chemical reactions cause changes in the 
concentration or types of ions in the water, or change the porosity because of mineral 
precipitation or dissolution, the estimated saturation changes will be in error.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.1-10 September 2002 
6.1.2.2 Neutron Logging 
Neutron logging was used to measure the moisture content in the rock through the various phases 
of the LBT. The neutron probe contains a source of high-energy neutrons and a detector for slow 
(thermal) neutrons. Neutron counts were measured in each hole at 10 cm intervals. The hydrogen 
in the water in the rocks slows down the neutrons, making them detectable. Thus, higher counts 
(or a positive difference in counts relative to background or pre-heating levels) indicate higher 
water content (or increased water content over background). Calibrations were conducted of the 
neutron tool in a liner-grout and liner-RTD-grout assemblies (identical to that used in the 
boreholes) to known moisture contents. Water content is calculated from the neutron counts 
using the calibration results. Under ambient conditions, the sampling volume surrounding the 
probe has a diameter of approximately 12 cm (Lin et al. 2001 [159069], Section 6.1.2.1.2); this 
volume diameter increases as moisture content decreases. 
Neutron logging was conducted in some of the vertical boreholes in the potential location of the 
block, before the boundary of the block was cut. This was to assess the initial moisture content in 
the outcrop. Then, after the cutting of the block boundary, the neutron logging was repeated to 
assess the changes in the moisture content resulting from the cutting. Cutting the block boundary 
using water had no significant effect on the moisture content of the block. Background moisture 
saturation levels were determined to be about 60 to 80%, for a laboratory-determined porosity of 
about 11%. Before the heating was started, the baseline moisture content in every neutron 
borehole was established. Then, during the heating phase and the consequent cooling phase of 
the test, neutron logging was conducted about once per month. In all cases, neutron counts were 
obtained at every 10 cm spacing in each borehole. The neutron counts were converted to fraction 
volume water content by using calibration results. 
Neutron logging was conducted in the five vertical boreholes (TN1 to TN5, as shown in Figure 
6.1-2), six horizontal boreholes from the north face (NN1 to NN6 in Figure 6.1-3), and four 
horizontal boreholes from the west face (WN1 to WN4 in Figure 6.1-5) after the completion of 
the installation of sensors (pre-heating) in February 1997. The neutron boreholes were equipped 
with a Teflon liner, and the space between the liner and the borehole wall was sealed with 
cement grout. Moisture content was determined with both the Teflon liner and the cement grout 
in place. The pre-heating measurement established the baseline so that the effect of heating the 
block on its moisture content could be determined. The neutron tool was calibrated in a 3.81 cm 
diameter borehole, with the Teflon liner/grout assembly exactly the same as in the neutron 
boreholes of the LBT. The neutron tool was calibrated both with and without Teflon liner and 
cement grout conditions. It was determined that the Teflon liner/grout assembly had no major 
effect on the determined moisture content. This is not surprising because the neutron boreholes 
in the LBT are designed in such a way that the thickness of the annular cement grout is minimal, 
only about 0.3 cm (Lin et al. 2001 [159069], p. 6-14). 
A complete set of the raw neutron counts, the location of measurements in each borehole, and the 
converted difference fraction volume water content are in the TDMS under the DTN: 
LL980919304244.075 [145099].

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.1-11 September 2002 
6.1.2.2.1 Results: Neutron Logging 
The difference fraction volume water content in TN3 during the test is presented in this section 
in graphical form, so that the process of moisture movement can be analyzed. The difference 
fraction volume water was calculated by subtracting the baseline fraction volume water from that 
measured during the test. 
Figure 6.1.2.2-1 shows the pre-heating (baseline) fraction-volume-water content in TN3 as a 
function of depth from the top of the block, respectively. This is an example of the baseline 
water content in the neutron borehole. Generally, the initial moisture content in the region near 
the collar is less than that in the borehole. The variation in the initial moisture content in each 
borehole is probably caused heterogeneity in the rock mass. 
Figures 6.1.2.2-2 and 6.1.2.2-3 show the difference fraction volume water in borehole TN3, as a 
function of depth from the top of the block. These are examples to illustrate the variation in the 
moisture content in the block as measured by neutron logging. Data for the other boreholes can 
be found in DTN: LL971204304244.047 [113894]. In these figures, the positive fraction volume 
water means gaining moisture content; the negative fraction volume water means losing moisture 
content. Generally, the vertical boreholes have a well-defined dryout zone developed after 48 
days of heating at the heater plane, which was at about 2.74 m from the top of the block. The 
dryout zone widened with time, and the extent of the drying also increased with time, because of 
the continuous heating. The widths of the maximum dryout zones, as measured at the half of the 
depth of the dryness in the five vertical boreholes, ranged from 1.49 to 1.69 m. It is fair to say 
that the width of the dryout zone is quite uniform. There was not much change in the extent of 
the dryness after Day 361 of heating. There were some variations in the shape of the tip of the 
dryout zone among those five vertical neutron boreholes. The dryness in those five vertical 
boreholes ranged from -0.07 to -0.09 fraction volume. Those variations among the five vertical 
boreholes illustrate the effect of heterogeneity in the block on the movement of moisture. Those 
figures do not show significant rewetting during the cool-down phase. 
The variation of the moisture content among the north-face neutron boreholes and the west-face 
neutron boreholes are similar, and are consistent with that shown in TN3. Generally, the 
variation of the moisture content was uniform across the block. The variation of the moisture 
content in the horizontal neutron boreholes depends on the vertical location of the borehole. 
The data also showed that the moisture movement in the block was almost one-dimensional. A 
well-defined dryout zone was developed at the heater plane. The neutron results did not show 
significant rewetting during the cool-down phase. Fractures have important roles in the localized 
movement of the moisture (Lin et al. 2001 [159069], pp. 6-14 and 6-16). 
6.1.2.2.2 Measurement Uncertainty: Neutron Logging 
Neutron logging provides comparatively more accurate measurement of water content than ERT 
and GPR measurements. But the volume or cross-sectional area covered by the neutron 
measurement, which is approximately a 15 cm radius from the borehole, is less than ERT and 
GPR. The variation of the moisture content in the cement grout between the Teflon liner and the

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.1-12 September 2002 
borehole wall may have some effect on the neutron counts. But the effect is small in the LBT 
because the thickness of the grout column is only about 0.3 cm. 
6.1.2.3 Passive MonitoringGas Pressure and Relative Humidity 
Gas pressure and relative humidity were measured in the four hydrology boreholes: TH1, NH1, 
WH1, and WH2. Packers were installed in those boreholes to pack off zones for the 
measurements. Each pack-off zone was about 0.46 m in length. One Humicap was installed in 
each pack-off zone, and a pressure line was installed to bring the gas pressure to a pressure 
transducer outside of the block. There were three pack-off zones in TH1: one each in NH1, 
WH1, and WH2. Detailed discussion of these measurements can be found in Section 9.2 of the 
Large Block Test Final Report (Lin et al. 2001 [159069]). The gas pressure and the relative 
humidity data can be found in the TDMS under the DTN: LL980918904244.074 [135872]. 
6.1.2.3.1 Results: Gas Pressure and Relative Humidity 
Since the pressure transducer outputs were all very noisy, only the relative humidity (RH) and 
temperature measured by the Humicap sensors will be presented. The Humicap sensors in the 
first two packed-off zones of the vertical borehole (TH1) also performed unreliably during the 
LBT. The discussion below, therefore, focuses on the third zone of the vertical borehole and the 
horizontal boreholes. The Humicap in WH1 and WH2 are the only two sensors that performed 
for the entire test period. Figures 6.1.2.3-1 and 6.1.2.3-2 show the temperature and relative 
humidity respectively as measured in WH2 (borehole WH2 is at about 0.5 m above the heater 
plane). These figures are used as examples of the humidity sensor data. Other humidity sensors 
functioned similarly. 
The WH2 temperature (Figure 6.1.2.3-1) results agree well with the temperatures measured by 
the RTDs. The initial RH was about 90% and remained high until slightly past 125 days (Figure 
6.1.2.3-2). The relative humidity values fell to about 25% by about 230 days. This decrease is 
consistent with the moisture content measured by neutron logging. Neutron logging in TN3 
(Figure 6.1.2.2-3) shows that more than 3% fraction volume water was lost between 130 days 
and 334 days of heating. This amount of moisture loss was almost half of the total moisture loss 
at that location in that borehole. The small number of humidity sensors deployed in the LBT 
limited the conclusive information about the TH process that can be drawn. However, the 
temperature and RH records from borehole WH2 clearly show that a dry zone extended 0.5 m or 
more above the heater plane after 135 days. Higher in the block, at 1.5 m above the heater plane 
(borehole WH-1), boiling conditions were never reached, and RH remained high throughout the 
LBT. Data also show that rewetting of dry zone was very slow following heater turn-off. 
6.1.2.3.2 Measurement Uncertainty: Relative Humidity 
The accuracy of humidity measurement is about 23% and the RTD temperature measured by 
the humidity sensor is accurate to within 0.3oC (Section 5.1 of the Single Heater Test Status 
Report (CRWMS M&O 1997 [101540])). But the primary uncertainty in the measurement may 
result from the conditions in the borehole, such as the sealing of the packer. In a highly fractured 
rock mass, sealing of a borehole by packers is likely to be incomplete. It is very difficult to 
provide a quantitative uncertainty caused by the leak through the packers.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.1-13 September 2002 
6.1.2.4 Laboratory ParametersMatrix Permeability, Density, Porosity, Micro-Pore 
Structure, Fracture Flow and Matrix Imbibition Visualization 
Small blocks of the rock at the LBT site were collected for laboratory testing of hydrologic 
properties and processes. Those hydrologic properties include density, porosity, water 
permeability, and moisture-retention curves. The hydrologic process investigated was fracture 
flow and matrix imbibition. Section 3.5.1.3 of the Large Block Test Final Report (Lin et al. 2001 
[159069]) carries the description of the laboratory tests in greater details. Here, the methods of 
the laboratory tests are briefly discussed and the results summarized. 
Matrix Permeability 
The water permeability of the Topopah Spring tuff samples obtained from Fran Ridge was 
measured in the laboratory as a function of temperature. The technique of measuring the 
permeability was the steady-state flow-through method. Core samples of about 2.54 cm in 
diameter and 5.1 cm in length were prepared from small block SPC00504573 collected at Fran 
Ridge during the excavation of the large block, with core identification numbers SPC00504573.4 
and SPC00504573.5. The test sample was first saturated with water. Then the sample was 
encapsulated in a membrane, which separated the sample from the confining pressure fluid. The 
sample assembly was placed within a pressure vessel with independently controlled confining 
pressure, pore-water pressure, and temperature. The sample was brought to an equilibrium of 
certain temperature, confining pressure, and pore pressure. 
A differential pressure across the length of the sample was created to cause a flow. The steadystate 
flow rate was measured. Permeability was calculated using Darcys equation, assuming the 
pore pressure gradient is linear. The measurement equipment used in the permeability 
measurement included a confining pressure transducer, pore pressure transducer, differential 
pressure transducer, and thermocouple to measure temperature. Flow rate was determined by 
letting water flow into a container on a balance. The weight of the balance corresponded to the 
volume of water that has flowed through the sample and is recorded by a computer, along with 
all the other data such as time, temperature, differential pressure, pore pressures, and confining 
pressure. Because the flow rate was low, it was necessary to consider the rate of evaporation 
from the collection bottle. This was found to be linear with time over a period of about one week. 
The water lost due to evaporation was 4.13 mg/hour. This lost water was added to the balance 
reading for a specific period of time when calculating permeability. The matrix permeability data 
can be found in the TDMS under the DTN: LL960905204244.022 [158244]. 
Density, Porosity and Micro-Pore Structure 
Section 3.5.1.3.3 of the Large Block Test Final Report (Lin et al. 2001 [159069]) presents the 
porosity and the micro-pore structure of the LBT samples. The porosity was determined by 
calculating the difference between the dry density and the water-saturated wet density, divided 
by the water density (the Gravimetric method). The micro-pore size distribution was determined 
by mercury-injection porosimetry, another conventional method in the study of rock pore 
structure. The density and porosity data from the dry-and-saturation method can be found in the 
TDMS under the DTN: LL950812704242.017 [158237].

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.1-14 September 2002 
Fracture Flow and Matrix Imbibition Visualization 
Section 3.5.1.3.4 of the Large Block Test Final Report (Lin et al. 2001 [159069]) presents the 
laboratory experiments using X-ray radiography to visualize fracture flow and matrix imbibition. 
The samples used in those visualizations were machined from small blocks obtained at the LBT 
site. A vertical tensile fracture was induced in the middle of the sample block of 2.5 cm 
thickness, oriented so that the plane of the fracture was parallel to the direction of X-ray 
transmission. At the top and bottom of the sample were chambers for ponding and collection of 
water. X-ray radiographs were taken periodically to image water movement into the fracture and 
rock matrix. A total of seven experiments were conducted. The experimental conditions included 
isothermal with and without shim, and at thermal gradients with shim. The role of the shim is to 
increase the aperture of the induced fracture. The X-ray radiograph data can be found in the 
TDMS under the DTN: LL981208404244.092 [158263]. 
6.1.2.4.1 Results: Matrix Permeability, Density, Porosity, Micro-Pore Structure, 
Fracture Flow and Matrix Imbibition Visualization 
Matrix Permeability 
The water/matrix permeability data of intact core sample SPC00504573.4 are summarized in 
Table 6.1.2.4-1. The permeability of the intact Topopah Spring tuff sample was less than 
10-18 m2. This permeability value is consistent with that measured in cores from Yucca 
Mountain (Lin and Daily 1984 [101393]). It is also shown in Table 6.1.2.4-1 that intact sample 
permeability was not a strong function of temperature. This is also consistent with that reported 
by Lin and Daily (1984 [101393]). 
Density, Porosity and Micro-Pore Structure 
Table 6.1.2.4-2 shows the porosity of the LBT samples. The porosity ranged from 0.08 to 0.14, 
with a mean of 0.104 for the 36 samples. The porosity of the 33 samples determined from the 
mercury injection porosimetry ranged from 0.08 to 0.20 with a mean of 0.115, which agreed well 
with that determined by dry-and-saturation method. 
Fracture Flow and Matrix Imbibition Visualization 
At room temperature, imbibition occurred chiefly through the matrix for the unshimmed fracture, 
with a roughly v-shaped wetting front. During the shimmed fracture experiment, water flowed 
along the fracture length first, then imbibed horizontally into the matrix. 
Under a thermal gradient, water flowed down the fracture quickly. There was significant lateral 
imbibition into the matrix from the fracture. Penetration of the boiling zone by the water depends 
on the water head. 
Figure 6.1.2.4-1 shows two images to illustrate the effect of water head on the fracture flow and 
matrix imbibition. In those two cases, the lower 67 cm from the bottom of the sample was the 
boiling zone. The convention used for the difference images is that darker colors or shades 
indicate relatively high X-ray attenuation and the presence of water, while the lighter areas 
correspond to lower attenuation and relatively dry areas. For a small water head of about 0.26 m,

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.1-15 September 2002 
the water wetted almost the entire fracture first, followed by imbibition into the matrix, as shown 
in Figure 6.1.2.4-1 (left image). Within 7.2 hours of ponding, the water penetrated about 3 cm 
into the boiling zone. Figure 6.1.2.4-1 (right image) shows that when the water head was 
increased to 0.46 m, the water flowed through the entire length of the fracture within minutes and 
continued to flow through the boiling region. Not much imbibition into the matrix was observed 
in this case. The difference in water head was enough to force water through the boiling zone 
without significant imbibition. 
6.1.2.4.2 Measurement Uncertainty: Matrix Permeability; Density, Porosity, Fracture 
Flow and Matrix Imbibition Visualization 
Matrix Permeability 
The factors contributing to permeability uncertainty include the measurement accuracy of flow 
rate, differential pressure, and temperature. Those measurements are all fairly accurate. The 
propagated error in the permeability through Darcys equation is small. This uncertainty does not 
include sample variation and scaling effects when the parameter is applied to the field. 
Density and Porosity 
The uncertainty of determining the density and porosity of a sample includes the uncertainty in 
the sample weight and volume, as discussed in the previous subsection, Moisture-Retention 
Curves. 
Fracture Flow and Matrix Imbibition Visualization 
The fracture flow and matrix imbibition experiments were intended to be qualitative 
observations. The main source of uncertainty is the similar X-ray attenuation caused by either 
increased water content or the forming of potassium iodide crystals. 
6.1.3 LBT Mechanical Measurements 
6.1.3.1 Multi-Point Borehole Extensometers (MPBX) Displacements 
The three-dimensional view of the six MPBX boreholes in the block is shown in Figure 
6.1.3.1-1. For the location of those boreholes in the top, north, and west sides of the block, see 
Figures 6.1-2, 6.1-3, and 6.1-5, respectively. Section 7.1.1 of the Large Block Test Final Report 
(Lin et al. 2001 [159069]) presents the MPBX measurements in detail. Each extensometer 
consists of three or four borehole anchors connected to linear variable displacement transducer 
(LVDTs) at the collar by invar rods. The anchors are numbered such that anchor 1 is nearest and 
anchor 4 is farthest from the collar. The anchors are spring-loaded to the borehole wall. Each 
anchor is connected to a LVDT at the collar by one invar rod. Any movement of the rock at an 
anchor transferred to the LVDT at the collar. Therefore, the extensometers measure linear 
displacement relative to the surface collar. In the data reduction, the thermal expansion of the 
invar rod was corrected from the raw displacement data by using the manufacturers invar rod 
thermal-expansion coefficient and the measured temperatures in TT1 and TT2.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.1-16 September 2002 
Pre-heating MPBX measurements were conducted for several days before the heaters were 
energized on February 28, 1997. The LVDTs were zeroed before the heating was started. All of 
the extensometers performed well during the first few weeks, but problems developed over time, 
beginning with NM-2, which is located near the heater plane. NM2 failed after about 40 days of 
heating. About 100 days into the heating phase, two more MPBXs (TM1 and NM1) failed. 
Before the heating phase ended, at about 375 days, TM2 and NM1 were repaired. Three out of 
the six MPBX provided complete sets of displacement data for the entire duration of the test. 
A detailed discussion of the LBT mechanical measurements is provided in Section 7.1 of the 
Large Block Test Final Report (Lin et al. 2001 [159069]). The Input-DTN for mechanical 
measurements are provided in Table 4-1. The Input-DTN for these MPBX displacements is 
LL980919404244.076 [148630]. 
6.1.3.1.1 Results: MPBX Displacements 
Figure 6.1.3.1-2 shows a typical example of the displacement data as a function of time. This is 
the displacement measured at the #4 anchor of WM2. Also shown in the figure is the temperature 
measured at TT2-22, which was about the same distance from the heater plane as WM2. Positive 
displacement means expansion; negative displacement means contraction. The measured 
displacement in the block tracked the temperature well indicating that the block expanded as a 
result of heating. 
The horizontal displacements near the base of the block were small, essentially the same in the 
two horizontal directions, and were recovered during cool-down. The horizontal displacements 
near the top of the block were large, isotropic, and were only partially recovered. The vertical 
displacement was fairly small but only partially recovered during cool-down. 
6.1.3.1.2 Measurement Uncertainty: MPBX Displacement 
There are several potential sources for measurement uncertainty in the displacement 
measurements presented in this section. These uncertainties, quantifiable and non-quantifiable, 
are listed below: 
Quantifiable 
. The accuracy of the instrumentation. 
. The conversion of the electrical output to engineering units. The uncertainty from these 
equations, and the computational (round-off) error inherent in the data conversion 
software, are negligible. 
. The physical location of the gages in the test region. The location uncertainty is 
particularly important in regions of high temperature gradient, of which hydrological 
and thermal expansion behavior are thought to be strong functions for certain 
temperature ranges. 
. The uncertainty related to the choice of method for computing thermal expansion of 
Invar rods based on measured temperatures along MPBXs is difficult to estimate. The

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.1-17 September 2002 
magnitude of any discretization error is likely not large enough to affect the general 
trends in thermal-mechanical deformation of the rock illustrated by the data. 
Non-quantifiable 
. Electrical interference, such as spurious signals from power surges, can cause lowmagnitude 
noise, unexplained meandering in the data, or high-magnitude spikes. 
. Unidentified sensor or MPBX assembly stability issues, which have caused a few 
LVDTs or vibrating wire gages to either produce "bad" data for an extended period of 
time before returning "good" data, or to have an unexplained shift in magnitude while 
maintaining expected rates of behavior on both sides of the shift. 
. Degradation or failure of the instrumentation. 
6.1.3.2 Fracture Monitoring 
Deformations of several major fractures that intersect the surface of the LBT block were 
monitored using three-component fracture monitors. The purpose of these sensors was to 
monitor the movement of fractures to gain information about the magnitude and direction of 
fracture deformation during the test, especially as it relates to TH behavior. 
Linear variable displacement transducers (LVDTs) were used to measure the displacements in 
the three-component surface fracture monitor. The sensors were mounted in T-shaped slots cut 
into the block, visible in Figure 6.1-1. The slots were cut so that one LVDT would measure 
aperture change or deformation across the fracture in the plane of the face, while the other two 
LVDTs would measure sliding in orthogonal directions, parallel and perpendicular to the face. 
The fractures chosen were oriented perpendicular to the face as much as possible; thus the 
information can be used to supply estimates of fracture deformation parameters, such as dilation 
with sliding. See Section 7.1.3 of the Large Block Test Final Report (Lin et al. 2001 [159069]) 
for detailed discussion of fracture monitoring. The Input-DTN for fracture monitoring is 
LL980919404244.076 [148630]. 
6.1.3.2.1 Results: Fracture Monitoring 
The fracture monitoring (FM) data show that the vertical and horizontal fractures responded 
somewhat differently. The major horizontal fracture near the top opened coincidentally with the 
TH event at Day 105. Both vertical and horizontal fractures showed closing during the thermal 
recovery from the TH events, that is, during periods of apparent condensate refluxing. Initial 
response for several of the FMs was associated with temperature at the heater plane. FM data 
indicate that the top of the block moved to the east. Most of the FM deformation was not 
recovered. The FM data are somewhat inconsistent with the MPBX data, as FMs indicate more 
deformation in lower portions of the block and less deformation in the upper portions of the 
block.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.1-18 September 2002 
6.1.3.2.2 Measurement Uncertainty: Fracture Monitoring 
The factors contributing to uncertainty in fracture monitoring include the accuracy of the LVDT, 
the rigidity of the mounting brackets, limited number of the monitoring points, the effects of the 
environmental conditions on the fracture monitor, the heterogeneity in the rock, and the apparent 
movement on the block surface. Similar to the MPBX, LVDTs are accurate. The uncertainty 
caused by the rest of these factors can only be assessed qualitatively. The mounting brackets and 
their posts in the rock have to be rigid. Fractures are more complex than planes. Limited number 
of measuring points cannot fully describe the movement of the fractures. The expansion and 
contraction of the fracture monitor owing to environmental temperature variations may cause 
significant uncertainty. Because the fractures are not really orthogonal to the block sides, the 
monitored movements on the block surface are apparent movements, not the true movements. 
6.1.4 LBT Miscellaneous Measurements and Observations 
Fracture mapping and qualitative observations were included in the LBT. Observations from 
boreholes included assessments of fracture flows and microbial survivability and migration. 
Fracture mapping and the activities in the observation boreholes, as well as microbial 
survivability and migration, will be summarized here. 
A detailed discussion of the LBT miscellaneous measurements is provided in the Large Block 
Test Final Report (Lin et al. 2001 [159069]). Large Block Test Final Report (Lin et al. 2001 
[159069]). The Input-DTN and Output-DTN for miscellaneous measurements are provided in 
Tables 4-1 and 6.1-1, respectively. 
6.1.4.1 Fracture Mapping 
Fracture mapping served many purposes: to characterize the test block, to help interpret test 
results, and to compare with the fracture characteristics of the Exploratory Studies Facility 
(ESF). Section 4 of the Large Block Test Final Report (Lin et al. 2001 [159069]) presents the 
fractures mapped in the block. Fractures were carefully mapped on the block surface (four sides 
and top). Information on the fracture was also collected from video logs of boreholes. On the 
block surface, fractures were mapped using a 30 . 30 cm grid system on all four vertical sides 
and the top of the block. The fracture locations were digitized, and fracture segment nodes were 
assigned x-y-z values. These discrete data points were then input into a 3-D modeling code 
(EarthVision Version 5.0). From the borehole video logs, the depths at which the fracture 
enters and exits the borehole were recorded, as well as the strike, dip, dip direction, aperture, and 
magnitude of the features. Appendix C of the Large Block Test Final Report (Lin et al. 2001 
[159069]) carries information of all borehole video logs. EarthVision generated the trace of the 
fractures on the block surface and created fracture planes in the block. The fracture information 
can be found in the TDMS under the following DTNs: LL960400404244.012 [158271], 
LL960400504244.013 [158274], LL960400604244.014 [158275], and LL960400704244.015 
[158276].

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.1-19 September 2002 
6.1.4.1.1 Results: Fracture Mapping 
Major fractures were identified based on the size, extent, continuity, and other considerations. 
The major fractures were then grouped into six systems according to their strike and dip. Figure 
6.1.4.1-1 shows 3-D views of all of the major fractures in the block. The fractures in the LBT 
were dominated by high-angle fractures. This is similar to the fractures in the ESF of Yucca 
Mountain. However, the fracture orientation in the block is somewhat different from that in the 
ESF. 
6.1.4.1.2 Measurement Uncertainty: Fracture Mapping 
The fractures were mapped by hand with tape measures and by viewing video logs, which have a 
measuring tape in the image. The accuracy of the measured location and extent of the fractures 
are about a few millimeters. The major uncertainty is in the continuity of the fractures within the 
block. EarthVision uses interpolation to extend a fracture between the block surface and the 
boreholes. But in reality, a fracture may be discontinued or have abrupt changes in its strike and 
dip. It is impossible to assess the accuracy of the fracture model generated by EarthVision 
without taking the block apart. 
One more important point may be the effect of the fractures on the coupled thermalhydrological-
mechanical-chemical processes. This is not an uncertainty issue of the fracture 
mapping per se, but is an uncertainty in the use of the fracture data. For example, a major 
fracture, as indicated by its appearance, may not be an effective flow path for the thermalhydrological 
process, or a dominant discontinuity for the thermal-mechanical process. The 
fracture surface roughness was not examined during the fracture mapping. The effect of the 
fractures on the thermal-chemical process is not clear. 
6.1.4.2 Video Observation of Boreholes 
Four observation boreholes, NO1, NO2, EO3, and WO5, were installed near the bottom of the 
block. See Figures 6.1-3, 6.1-4, and 6.1-5 respectively for the location of these boreholes. 
6.1.4.2.1 Results: Video Observation of Boreholes 
Section 9.1 of the Large Block Test Final Report (Lin et al. 2001 [159069]) carries detail 
description of the observations performed in these observation boreholes. Briefly, these 
observation boreholes were equipped with a Pyrex tube with ink marks on its top. The Pyrex 
tube was put in a half-PVC pipe, cushioned by one piece of white cloth. The Pyrex tube was to 
allow access to a video camera for viewing fracture flows in a borehole. The ink marks on the 
Pyrex tube and the white cloth under the tube were to provide markers of fracture flow. 
Observations were performed periodically. It was obvious very early that the moisture in the tube 
prohibited any meaningful direct observation by a video camera. Most of the observations were 
performed by examining the ink marks on the tube and the ink stains on the white cloth. Many 
discrete markers (ink stains) were observed in the white cloth. But it was also obvious that 
condensation on the tube dissolved away a significant portion of the ink marks.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.1-20 September 2002 
6.1.4.2.2 Measurement Uncertainty: Video Observation of Boreholes 
These observations have qualitative uncertainties, which are inherent to visual observations of 
geologic features. 
6.1.4.3 Microbial Observation 
Section 9.3 of the Large Block Test Final Report (Lin et al. 2001 [159069]) provides a detailed 
summary of the findings concerning microbial survivability and migration. Microbes were 
collected from the rock at the LBT site and cultured to be double-drug resistant. The labeled 
microbes were placed in the heater boreholes and the two vertical boreholes identified as LBL-1 
and LBL-2 in Figure 6.1-2. The purpose was to test the survivability of the microbes and their 
migration in the heated, partially saturated rock environment. The observation performed was to 
periodically sample the moisture on the Pyrex tube and the white cloth cushion in the 
observation boreholes mentioned above. The data on the microbial types, abundance, and growth 
rates can be found in the TDMS under the DTN: LL981202305912.004 [158270]. 
6.1.4.3.1 Results: Microbial Observation 
Basically, the microbes were found in the observation boreholes, which were about 1.5 m below 
the heater boreholes. This observation indicates that the microbes survived the heating and 
traveled with drainage water to the observation boreholes. 
6.1.4.3.2 Measurement Uncertainty: Microbial Observation 
The microbial observation was intended to be qualitative and scoping. Uncertainty assessment 
for the qualitative activity is not meaningful.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.1-1 September 2002 
Figure 6.1-1. The LBT Block of Topopah Spring Tuff at Fran Ridge

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.1-2 September 2002 
G - Grouted 
x 
y 
Figure 6.1-2. LBT Vertical Boreholes Drilled from the Top of the Block

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.1-3 September 2002 
x 
-z 
Figure 6.1-3. LBT Sensor Boreholes Drilled from the North Side of the Block

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.1-4 September 2002 
y 
-z
Figure 6.1-4. LBT Boreholes Drilled from the East Side of the Block

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.1-5 September 2002 
WR# - West side REKA borehole 
y 
-z 
Figure 6.1-5. LBT Sensor Boreholes Drilled from the West Side of the Block

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.1-6 September 2002 
0 
100 
200 
300 
400 
500 
600 
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 
elapsed Time, day 
Power, W 
WATT-1 
Figure 6.1.1.1-1. The Power History of the LBT Heater EH1 
TT1-14 of the Large Block Test. 
0 
20 
40 
60 
80 
100 
120 
140 
160 
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 
Days after Start of Heating (2/28/97 - 9/30/98) 
Temperature (C) 
TT1-14 
Figure 6.1.1.2-1. Temperature History at LBT TT1-14 
TT1-14

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.1-7 September 2002 
TT2-14 of the Large Block Test. 
0 
20 
40 
60 
80 
100 
120 
140 
160 
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 
Days after Start of Heating (2/28/97 - 9/30/98) 
Temperature (C) 
TT2-14 
Figure 6.1.1.2-2. Temperature History at LBT TT2-14 
TT2-14

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.1-8 September 2002 
Figure 6.1.2.1-1. LBT Layout of ERT Electrodes

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.1-9 September 2002 
Figure 6.1.2.1-2. Distribution of Moisture Content in Two Horizontal Planes from LBT ERT

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.1-10 September 2002 
Figure 6.1.2.1-3. Distribution of Moisture Content in Two Vertical Planes in LBT

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.1-11 September 2002 
0 
0.02 
0.04 
0.06 
0.08 
0.1 
0.12 
0.14 
0.16 
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 
Depth from Collar, m 
Fraction Volume Water 
2/ 25/ 97-1 
2/ 25/ 97-2 
Figure 6.1.2.2-1. Difference Fraction Volume Water Content Measured in LBT Vertical Borehole TN3 
using Neutron Logging (Pre-Heating/Baseline) 
Difference Fraction Volume Water Content

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.1-12 September 2002 
-0.08 
-0.07 
-0.06 
-0.05 
-0.04 
-0.03 
-0.02 
-0.01
0 
0.01 
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 
Depth from Top, m 
Fraction Volume Water 
11 days 
25 days 
48 days 
60 days 
74 days 
88 days 
103 days 
Figure 6.1.2.2-2. Difference Fraction Volume Water Content Measured in LBT Borehole TN3 using 
Neutron Logging (March 11 to June 11, 1997) 
Difference Fraction Volume Water Content

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.1-13 September 2002 
-0.09 
-0.08 
-0.07 
-0.06 
-0.05 
-0.04 
-0.03 
-0.02 
-0.01
0 
0.01
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 
Depth from Collar, m 
Fraction Volume Water 
130 days 
334 days 
361 days 
411 days 
437 days 
473 days 
501 days 
538 days 
564 days 
Figure 6.1.2.2-3. Difference Fraction Volume Water Content Measured in LBT Borehole TN3 using 
Neutron Logging (July 8, 1997, to September 15, 1998) 
Difference Fraction Volume Water Content

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.1-14 September 2002 
Figure 6.1.2.3-1. Temperature Measured in LBT Borehole WH-2 as a Function of Time

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.1-15 September 2002 
Figure 6.1.2.3-2. Relative Humidity Measured by the Humicap in LBT Borehole WH-2 as a Function of 
Time

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.1-16 September 2002 
Figure 6.1.2.4-1. Images of Imbibition Under Thermal Gradient: (left) 0.26 m Water Head at 7.2 Hours 
and (right) 0.46 m Water Head at 0.67 Hours

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.1-17 September 2002 
Figure 6.1.3.1-1. MPBX Borehole Locations, Viewed from the South Face

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.1-18 September 2002 
0 
0.5
1 
1.5
2 
2.5
3 
0
15 
30 
45 
60 
75 
90 
0 100 200 300 400 500 
0 100 200 300 400 500 
WM2-4 TT2-22 
Elapsed Time (Days) 
Figure 6.1.3.1-2. East-West Displacement for WM-2 Anchor 4 and Temperature at 1.2-m Depth

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.1-19 September 2002 
Figure 6.1.4.1-1. Three-Dimensional Depiction of the Major Mapped Fractures Cutting the LBT Block

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.1-20 September 2002 
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.1-1 September 2002 
Table 6.1-1. Output-DTNs along with Input-DTNs for the Large Block Test1 
Input-DTN [DIRS] Input-DTN 
Description 
Input-DTN 
Text Location Output-DTN Output-DTN 
Description 
LL980918904244.074 [135872] Heater Power, 
Temperature, 
Relative Humidity, 
and Gas Pressure 
6.1.1.1 
6.1.1.2 
6.1.2.3 
LL020710523142.025 Heater Power, 
Temperature, and 
Displacement 
Data. 
LL980919404244.076 [148630] Rock Mass 
Displacements 
6.1.3.1 
6.1.3.2 
LL980913304244.072 [145385] Electrical Resistance 
Tomograms 
6.1.2.1 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
LL981001604244.079 [158261] Electrical Resistivity 6.1.2.1 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
LL980919304244.075 [145099] Neutron Logging 6.1.2.2 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
LL950812704242.017 [158237] Porosity, Saturated 
and Dry Density 
6.1.2.4 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
LL960905204244.022 [158244] Laboratory Matrix 
Permeability 
6.1.2.4 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
LL981208404244.092 [158263] X-ray Radiography 6.1.2.4 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
LL960400404244.012 [158271] Fracture Mapping 6.1.4.1 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
LL960400504244.013 [158274] Fracture Mapping 6.1.4.1 
LL960400604244.014 [158275] Fracture Mapping 6.1.4.1 
LL960400704244.015 [158276] Fracture Mapping 6.1.4.1 
LL981202305912.004 [158270] Bacterial Transport 6.1.4.3 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
NOTE: 1 DTNs: LA0106FH831151.002 [158230] and LA0106FH831151.003 [158229] provide access (Records 
Processing Center) to all thermal and mechanical data collected in LBT Data Collection System 
(original/electrical and converted/engineering units). These non-qualified DTNs also proves access (RPC) 
to pertinent measurement information such as scientific notebooks and calibration procedures.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.1-2 September 2002 
Table 6.1-2. XYZ Coordinates of the Collar and Bottom of LBT Boreholes* 
Borehole 
ID (Alt. ID) 
X-Collar 
(m) 
Y-Collar 
(m) 
Z-Collar 
(m) 
X-Bottom 
(m) 
Y-Bottom 
(m) 
Z-Bottom 
(m) Borehole Type 
eh1 (EH1) 3.05 0.30 -2.74 0.30 0.30 -2.74 Heater 
eh2 (EH2) 3.05 0.91 -2.74 0.30 0.91 -2.74 
eh3 (EH3) 3.05 1.52 -2.74 0.30 1.52 -2.74 
eh4 (EH4) 3.05 2.13 -2.74 0.30 2.13 -2.74 
eh5 (EH5) 3.05 2.74 -2.74 0.30 2.74 -2.74 
e7 (TT1) 1.22 1.83 0.00 1.22 1.83 -5.51 RTD 
e1 (TT2) 2.44 1.22 0.00 2.40 1.19 -5.38 
nt1 (NT1) 2.74 3.05 -2.44 2.74 0.30 -2.44 
nt2 (NT2) 0.91 3.05 -0.61 0.91 0.30 -0.61 
nt3 (NT3) 0.91 3.05 -3.20 0.91 0.30 -3.20 
nt4 (NT4) 0.30 3.05 -2.44 0.30 0.30 -2.44 
wt1 (WT1) 0.00 1.68 -0.76 2.74 1.68 -0.76 
wt2 (WT2) 0.00 1.68 -1.68 2.74 1.68 -1.68 
wt3 (WT3) 0.00 1.68 -3.05 2.74 1.68 -3.05 
tr1 (TR1) 1.27 1.32 0.00 1.27 1.32 -1.42 REKA 
wr1 (WR1) 0.00 0.63 -1.86 1.75 0.63 -1.86 
wr2 (WR2) 0.00 0.91 -3.32 1.75 0.91 -3.32 
te1 (ERT) 1.52 1.37 0.00 1.52 1.37 -3.96 ERT 
e5 (TN1) 1.22 0.61 0.00 1.18 0.57 -5.64 Neutron 
e3 (TN2) 1.83 0.61 0.00 1.83 0.62 -3.75 
e6 (TN3) 1.22 1.22 0.00 1.21 1.16 -5.64 
e2 (TN4) 2.44 1.83 0.00 2.41 1.82 -5.44 
e8 (TN5) 1.22 2.44 0.00 1.21 2.45 -5.21 
nn1 (NN1) 2.13 3.05 -0.91 2.13 0.30 -0.91 
nn2 (NN2) 2.13 3.05 -1.98 2.13 0.30 -1.98 
nn3 (NN3) 2.13 3.05 -3.81 2.13 0.30 -3.81 
nn4 (NN4) 0.91 3.05 -0.91 0.91 0.30 -0.91 
nn5 (NN5) 0.91 3.05 -1.98 0.91 0.30 -1.98 
nn6 (NN6) 0.91 3.05 -3.81 0.91 0.30 -3.81 
wn1 (WN1) 0.00 2.13 -0.76 2.74 2.13 -0.76 
wn2 (WN2) 0.00 2.13 -1.68 2.74 2.13 -1.68 
wn3 (WN3) 0.00 1.68 -3.96 2.74 1.68 -3.96 
wn4 (WN4) 0.00 0.91 -1.68 2.74 0.91 -1.68 
n1 (TH1) 1.83 1.83 0.00 1.81 1.76 -4.01 Hydrology 
nh1 (NH1) 0.00 3.05 -2.44 2.13 0.30 -2.44 
wh1 (WH1) 0.00 1.68 -1.22 2.74 1.68 -1.22 
wh2 (WH2) 0.00 1.68 -2.29 2.74 1.68 -2.29 
no1 (NO1) 2.13 3.05 -4.11 2.13 0.30 -4.11 Observation 
no2 (NO2) 0.91 3.05 -4.11 0.91 0.30 -4.11 
eo3 (EO3) 3.05 2.74 -3.96 0.30 2.74 -3.96 
wo5 (WO5) 0.00 0.91 -3.96 2.74 0.91 -3.96 
n2 (TM1) 1.83 1.22 0.00 1.82 1.21 -4.05 Mechanical 
n3 (TM2) 1.83 2.44 0.00 1.78 2.42 -4.09 
nm1 (NM1) 2.74 3.05 -3.81 2.74 0.30 -3.81 
nm2 (NM2) 0.91 3.05 -2.44 0.91 0.30 -2.44 
nm3 (NM3) 0.30 3.05 -0.91 0.30 0.30 -0.91 
wm1 (WM1) 0.00 2.13 -3.96 2.74 2.13 -3.96 
wm2 (WM2) 0.00 0.91 -1.22 2.74 0.91 -1.22 
wm3 (WM3) 0.00 0.91 -3.05 2.74 0.91 -3.05

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.1-3 September 2002 
Table 6.1-2. XYZ Coordinates of the Collar and Bottom of LBT Boreholes* (continued) 
Borehole 
ID (Alt. ID) 
X-Collar 
(m) 
Y-Collar 
(m) 
Z-Collar 
(m) 
X-Bottom 
(m) 
Y-Bottom 
(m) 
Z-Bottom 
(m) Borehole Type 
n4 1.52 3.05 0.00 1.52 3.05 -6.4 Rock bolt boreholes 
n5 0 1.52 0 0 1.52 -6.4 
n6 1.52 0 0 1.52 0 -6.4 
n7 3.05 1.52 0 3.05 1.52 -6.4 
PTC#1 1.22 3.05 -2.29 1.22 0.00 -2.29 Post-cooling 
PTC#2 1.22 3.05 -2.02 1.22 0.00 -1.48 
PTC#3 1.22 3.05 -2.56 1.22 0.00 -3.09 
PTC#4 1.22 3.05 -1.73 1.22 0.00 -0.62 
PTC#5 1.22 3.05 -2.84 1.22 0.00 -3.95 
PTC#6 1.22 3.05 -1.41 1.22 0.00 0.35 
PTC#7 1.22 3.05 -3.76 1.22 0.00 -6.70 
PTC#8 1.22 3.05 -1.01 1.22 0.00 1.55 
PTC#9 1.22 3.05 -2.29 2.53 0.00 -2.29 
PTC#10 0.00 1.83 -1.09 3.05 1.83 1.29 
PTC#11 0.00 1.83 -1.30 3.05 1.83 0.68 
PTC#12 0.00 1.83 -1.51 3.05 1.83 0.04 
PTC#13 0.00 1.83 -1.73 3.05 1.83 -0.62 
PTC#14 0.00 1.83 -1.91 3.05 1.83 -1.15 
PTC#15 0.00 1.83 -2.26 3.05 1.83 -2.21 
PTC#16 0.00 1.83 -2.55 3.05 1.83 -3.09 
PTC#17 0.00 1.83 -2.84 3.05 1.83 -3.95 
PTC#18 0.00 1.83 -3.35 3.05 1.83 -5.49 
PTC#19 0.00 1.83 -2.18 3.05 1.83 -1.97 
PTC#19a 0.00 1.83 -2.29 3.05 0.52 -2.29 
e10 (LBL1) 0.61 1.83 0.00 0.55 1.81 -4.00 Micro. 
e9 (LBL2) 0.61 1.22 0.00 0.61 1.22 -3.98 
* Source: Large Block Final Report (Lin et al. 2001 [159069]). 
Table 6.1.2.4-1. LBT Permeability Measurements on Intact Core Sample SPC00504573.4 
Temperature 
(C) 
Confining Pressure 
(Mpa) 
Differential Pressure 
(Mpa) 
Permeability 
(D) 
23 5.06 1.92 0.12 
25 5.07 2.47 0.14 
53 5.06 2.42 0.11 
53 5.06 1.91 0.15 
91 5.06 2.17 0.14 
92 5.06 1.60 0.14 
154 5.06 1.61 0.09 
130 5.05 1.46 0.13 
130 5.05 2.04 0.11 
83 5.06 2.02 0.17 
26 5.06 2.59 0.67 
26 5.06 2.61 0.20

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.1-4 September 2002 
Table 6.1.2.4-2. Density and Porosity of LBT Samples Determined by Gravimetric Method 
Sample Sample ID Depth 
(m) 
Dry wt 
(g) 
Wet wt 
(g) 
Dry density 
(g/cm3) 
Wet density 
(g/cm3) 
Porosity 
N1-6.3 0032079.3 1.92 1.5352 1.6111 2.23 2.35 0.110 
N1-6.3A 0032079.3A 1.92 1.7890 1.8680 2.26 2.36 0.0997 
N1-6.3B 0032079.3B 1.92 1.6358 1.7098 2.28 2.39 0.103 
N1-11.0 0032081.3 3.35 1.6352 1.7181 2.25 2.37 0.114 
N1-11.0A 0032081.3A 3.35 1.5920 1.6734 2.26 2.38 0.116 
N1-11.0B 0032081.3B 3.35 1.6762 1.7525 2.30 2.41 0.105 
N1-13.45 0032082.3 4.10 1.4982 1.5752 2.27 2.39 0.117 
N1-13.45A 0032082.3A 4.10 1.7118 1.7951 2.27 2.38 0.110 
N1-13.45B 0032082.3B 4.10 1.6954 1.7781 2.26 2.37 0.110 
N1-16.9 0032083.3 5.15 1.6499 1.7522 2.20 2.33 0.136 
N1-16.9A 0032083.3A 5.15 1.6094 1.6987 2.23 2.35 0.124 
N1-16.9B 0032083.3B 5.15 1.6885 1.7670 2.27 2.38 0.106 
N1-20.3 0032084.3 6.19 1.5438 1.6133 2.22 2.32 0.0998 
N1-20.3A 0032084.3A 6.19 1.5567 1.6244 2.26 2.36 0.0982 
N1-20.3B 0032084.3B 6.19 1.5109 1.5849 2.21 2.32 0.108 
N4-11.6 0032104.3 3.54 1.5429 1.6036 2.26 2.34 0.0887 
N4-11.6A 0032104.3A 3.54 1.6222 1.6864 2.24 2.33 0.0886 
N4-11.6B 0032104.3B 3.54 1.6375 1.6969 2.27 2.35 0.0823 
N5-4.9 0032107.3 1.49 1.6998 1.7687 2.25 2.34 0.0911 
N5-4.9A 0032107.3A 1.49 1.6501 1.7104 2.28 2.37 0.0834 
N5-4.9B 0032107.3B 1.49 1.8818 1.9569 2.31 2.40 0.0922 
N5-20.4 0032111.3 6.22 1.5230 1.5909 2.22 2.32 0.0992 
N5-20.4A 0032111.3A 6.22 1.4883 1.5593 2.21 2.32 0.106 
N5-20.4B 0032111.3B 6.22 1.4765 1.5463 2.22 2.32 0.105 
N6-4.75 0032112.3 1.43 1.7549 1.8228 2.25 2.33 0.0869 
N6-4.75A 0032112.3A 1.43 1.6761 1.7374 2.29 2.37 0.0837 
N6-4.75B 0032112.3B 1.43 1.7136 1.7755 2.27 2.35 0.0819 
N6-14.2 0032116.3 4.33 1.6590 1.7398 2.26 2.37 0.110 
N6-14.2A 0032116.3A 4.33 1.6869 1.7706 2.24 2.35 0.111 
N6-14.2B 0032116.3B 4.33 1.6285 1.7137 2.23 2.35 0.117 
N7-5.7 0032120.3 1.74 1.6161 1.7003 2.24 2.36 0.117 
N7-5.7A 0032120.3A 1.74 1.6320 1.7051 2.29 2.39 0.102 
N7-5.7B 0032120.3B 1.74 1.7091 1.7834 2.28 2.38 0.0991 
N7-11.0 0032123.3 3.35 1.5850 1.6705 2.25 2.37 0.121 
N7-11.0A 0032123.3A 3.35 1.6353 1.7171 2.26 2.38 0.113 
N7-11.0B 0032123.3B 3.35 1.6318 1.7112 2.27 2.38 0.110 
mean* 36 samples 2.250.03 2.360.02 0.1040.013 
Source: Roberts and Lin 1995 [159048] 
NOTE: Sample name consists of borehole designation followed by depth in feet below the template used to locate 
vertical boreholes. 
*Statistical mean for 36 samples. Errors represent one standard deviation for all samples collectively.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.2-1 September 2002 
6.2 SINGLE HEATER TEST (SHT) 
The SHT was the first of several planned and conducted in situ thermal tests to investigate 
coupled processes in the local rock mass surrounding the potential repository. These coupled 
processes are thermally driven by heat released from an electrical heater that simulates heat from 
emplaced nuclear waste. The SHT is located in the same rock unit (Tptpmn) as the LBT, but the 
LBT block is from an outcrop while the SHT (and DST) are in situ or underground. More 
specifically, the SHT is located in Alcove 5 in the ESF as shown in Figure 6.2-1. The heating 
phase of the SHT started in August 1996 and continued for nine months until May 1997. The 
cooling phase continued for seven months until January 1998, at which time post-cooling 
characterization of the test block commenced. A detailed description of the SHT is in the Single 
Heater Test Final Report (CRWMS M&O 1999 [129261]). 
The test block was characterized under ambient conditions prior to heater activation. 
Characterization included testing in the laboratory for thermal, mechanical, and hydrological 
properties, mineralogic-petrologic characteristics, as well as field measurements of 
permeabilities and fracture characteristics (CRWMS M&O 1996 [101428]). 
SHT Input-DTNs and related information such as Q-status and respective locations in this report 
(figures, tables, and text) are tabulated in Table 4-2. SHT Output-DTNs are tabulated in Table 
6.2-1. 
A plan and cross section of the SHT are shown in Figure 6.2-2. The SHT block is approximately 
12.9 m wide, 9.5 m deep and 5.5 m high. Forty-one boreholes with total length of 230 m are 
drilled into the block. Borehole 1 (shown in red in Figure 6.2-2) houses the single 5 m long 
heater capable of generating nominal 4 kW of heat. The other boreholes are installed with 
various equipment systems and sensors to monitor the thermal, mechanical, hydrological, and 
chemical responses of the rock as it was heated and cooled. Detailed description of the SHT asbuilt 
borehole locations is provided in Table 6.2-2. Coordinates of the various SHT sensors are 
provided in Appendix G of the Single Heater Test Final Report (CRWMS 1999 [129261]) and 
the respective Output-DTNs identified in Table 6.2-1. The origin of the SHT XYZ coordinate 
system is the center of the collar for the heater borehole. The X-axis is horizontal and positive to 
the right when facing the heater borehole, the Y-axis is also horizontal and follows the 
longitudinal direction of the heater borehole, and the Z-axis is vertical and positive in the upward 
direction. The borehole numbers in Figure 6.2-2 correspond to those in Table 6.2-2. Table 6.2-2 
gives the sensor type or type of measurement for which any particular borehole is used. A total 
of 530 sensors were housed in the boreholes. Several boreholes were drilled for post-cooling 
characterization. The layout of the additional boreholes in the SHT block is shown in 
Table 6.2-3. 
Most of the measurements made by the sensors were scanned and recorded by an automated 
Data Collection System (DCS). The central component of the DCS was a Geomation Model 
2380 MCUs in NEMA-12 enclosure with a capacity of 640 channels. The DCS records the 
heater power and the readings of the thermocouples mounted on the heater itself every 15 
minutes. The readings of the other sensors were recorded hourly. Certain measurements that 
were not recorded by the DCS included electrical resistivity tomography (ERT), neutron logging,

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.2-2 September 2002 
ground penetrating radar (GPR), Goodman Jack (borehole jack), pneumatic permeability, and 
infrared (IR) imaging. 
The SHT DCS recorded thermal, hydrological (partial), and mechanical data, for the most part, 
on an hourly basis. The acquired data consists of both original (measured electronic values) and 
converted (engineering units). A package of data was submitted to the Records Processing 
Center (RPC) and a corresponding DTN: LA0002FH6001WP.001 [158278] was also obtained. 
This DCS-DTN is considered non-qualified because it is stored in the RPC but it does identify 
compact discs of identical qualified data that are distributed to the Thermal Test Team. These 
DCS-DTNs also identify scientific notebooks that provide details of SHT measurements 
including calibration information. These DCS-DTNs are reduced and re-structured and 
periodically submitted to the TDMS resulting in many of the Input-DTNs introduced below and 
listed in Table 4-2. As discussed in Section 1 and the introduction to Section 6, these Input- 
DTNs are further refined, reduced, and restructured before being resubmitted to the TDMS as 
Output-DTNs (see Table 6.2-1). In summary, the end user has access to three levels of data for 
SHT thermal, hydrological (partial), mechanical measurements: DCS-DTNs, Input-DTNs, and 
Output-DTNs. For most future applications, it is anticipated that end users will access the 
Output-DTNs because they are more user friendly. 
6.2.1 SHT Thermal Measurements 
Thermal measurements include the heater power and the temperatures at various locations in the 
test block. A detailed description of the thermal measurements discussed below can be found in 
Section 7.2 of the Single Heater Test Final Report (CRWMS M&O 1999 [129261]). 
The Input-DTNs and Output-DTNs for SHT power and thermal measurements are listed in 
Tables 4-2 and 6.2-1, respectively. 
6.2.1.1 Heater Power 
The heater assembly for the SHT consisted of two single-ended 4,000-watt heating elements 
centered in a 5.4 cm (2.125 in.) diameter copper tube with a copper end cap at the bottom end. 
The two heating elements were contained in a nominally 2.5-cm (1-in.) diameter carbon-steel 
inner casing. The heating elements were made of nicrome and were each 5 m long, with a 180 
bend at the bottom end. The design of the SHT heater allowed for one of the heating elements to 
act as a secondary heating source in the event that the other failed, or if additional heat needed to 
be added to the rock. The heater included a control loop that allowed for automatic switching 
from the primary element to the secondary element if the heater power dropped below a 
prescribed set point. Throughout the test, the heating elements were operated one at a time. 
The heater power, voltage, and current were monitored using a Magtrol power monitor. The SHT 
called for the heater power to be nominally 4,000 watts for a period of nine months, followed by 
a cooldown period with the heater off completely. The cooldown period lasted approximately 
seven months. 
The SHT power data may be found in Input-DTN SNF35110695001.008 [113812].

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.2-3 September 2002 
6.2.1.1.1 Results: Heater Power 
The heater power history for the SHT over time periods of two weeks is illustrated in Figure 
6.2.1.1-1. Power was applied to the heater starting on August 26, 1996, at 18:30:30 Universal 
Coordinated Time, time zero in Figure 6.2.1.1-1 showing the elapsed time from the activation of 
the heater. Between the time of activation and May 28, 1997, but omitting the anomalous data 
intervals and heater down times, the heater power output averaged approximately 3,800 watts. 
The data indicate that the power output of the heater under normal operation declined by 
approximately 130 watts (3%) over the nine months that it was in operation. The heater was 
deactivated 275 days after being activated. 
6.2.1.1.2 Measurement Uncertainty: Heater Power 
The uncertainty in SHT power is similar to that discussed for the LBT in Section 6.1.1.1.2. 
6.2.1.2 Temperatures 
The thermocouple probes used in the SHT consist of Type-K thermocouples enclosed within 
304 stainless steel, 0.64 cm (0.25 in.) diameter sheaths. The thermocouples within the sheaths 
were insulated from each other with magnesium oxide. Thermocouple probes were installed in 
seven boreholes in the rock mass around the heater to monitor temperature changes away from 
the heater. Three additional thermocouple probes were installed on the top, side, and bottom of 
the heater canister to monitor heater surface temperatures. 
Five of the boreholes (boreholes 812) were drilled roughly parallel to the heater axis to a depth 
slightly exceeding the planned heater installation depth. Within these five boreholes, probes 
TMA-TC-1, TMA-TC-2, TMA-TC-3, TMA-TC-4, and TMA-TC-5 were located at nominal 
radial distances from the heater borehole of 0.4 m, 0.7 m, and 1.5 m, roughly corresponding to 
the numerically predicted temperature isotherms of 200C, 150C, and 100C, respectively 
(CRWMS M&O 1996 [101375], pp. 3-2 and 3-5). Within each of these five boreholes, two 
thermocouple probes were installed. Two probes were required during test planning because the 
drift width was too narrow to allow installation of 8 m long thermocouple probes. Therefore, for 
each of these boreholes, two probes were used: one approximately 6 m long with ten Type-K 
thermocouple junctions spaced along its length (designated probe A for each borehole), and 
one approximately 2 m long with five Type-K thermocouple junctions spaced along its length 
(designated probe B for each borehole). The other two thermocouple probes (TMA-TC-6 and 
TMA-TC-7) were drilled perpendicular to the heater borehole from the Observation Drift and the 
Thermal-Mechanical Alcove Extension. 
Temperatures were also measured on each of the free surfaces of the SHT block, using individual 
Type-K thermocouple junctions. Twelve individual thermocouples were installed on each face of 
the SHT block. 
Temperatures were measured between the two layers of insulation on each of the three free 
surfaces of the SHT block, using individual thermistors. Five individual thermistors were 
installed between the layers of insulation on each face of the SHT block

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.2-4 September 2002 
The complete set of temperature data are provided in the Output-DTN identified in Table 6.2-1. 
The Output-DTN for the SHT temperature measured in the rock mass are organized into a series 
of EXCEL workbooks, one for each borehole, with temperatures sampled every fourteen days. 
Each of the workbooks contains two charts, with the data on an accompanying worksheet. The 
first chart shows the temperature history for thermocouples or RTDs. The second chart shows 
temperature profiles as a function of a spatial coordinate at various times during the SHT heating 
and cooling phases. The coordinates for borehole endpoints and corresponding sensors are also 
provided in the workbooks. 
The SHT temperature data may be found in the Input-DTNs: SNF35110695001.008 [113812] 
and SNF35110695001.009 [113819]. 
6.2.1.2.1 Results: Temperatures 
Because of the abundance of SHT temperature measurements, only representative discussion and 
graphics are provided below. All temperature data can be access in the Output-DTN identified in 
Table 6.2-1. Complete discussion of the SHT temperature data is documented in the Single 
Heater Test Final Report (CRWMS M&O 1999 [129261]). 
The following discussion uses borehole 15 and borehole 1 to illustrate how temperature results 
are displayed in the output workbooks for individual boreholes. Borehole 15 is parallel to the 
x-direction and angles upward such that it extends above and beyond the heater as shown in 
Figure 6.2-2. Figures 6.2.1.2-1 and 6.2.1.2-2 present typical temperature history and temperature 
profile results for temperature sensors located in borehole 15. Figures 6.2.1.2-3 and 6.2.1.2-4 
present the temperature history and temperature profile for borehole 1, respectively. 
Expectedly, interruptions to heater power reduced the rock temperature but only slightly. When 
the heater was turned off after 275 days, the temperatures of the sensors dropped rapidly. The 
temperatures recorded by sensors closest to the center of the heater, which recorded the warmest 
temperatures, dropped more rapidly than the sensors further from the center of the heater. By 
523 days after heater activation (after 248 days of cooling) the temperature recorded by the 
sensors in borehole 1 had cooled to between 23 and 32 C. 
6.2.1.2.2 Measurement Uncertainty: Temperatures 
The uncertainty in SHT temperature measurements involves both RTDs and thermocouples. In 
general in the SHT, RTDs measured temperatures in the neutron boreholes and thermocouples 
measured temperatures in most other boreholes. 
The RTD is accurate within 0.3oC (Section 5.1 of the Single Heater Test Status Report (CRWMS 
M&O 1997 [101540])). With consideration of other factors, such as uncertainty in the location of 
the RTDs, the accuracy of the measured temperature in the SHT is estimated to be within 2.C. 
The RTD bundles were grouted in the boreholes, consequently some of the RTDs may not have 
had direct contact with the borehole wall. There may also have been some time delay between 
the temperature variations in the rock and that measured by the RTDs. But it is believed that this 
time delay was small because the rock mass was heated slowly. The thermocouple is accurate 
within 2.2oC (Section 5.1 of the Single Heater Test Status Report (CRWMS M&O 1997

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.2-5 September 2002 
[101540])). With consideration of other factors, such as uncertainty in the location of the RTDs, 
the overall accuracy of the measured temperature in the SHT is estimated to be within 3.5.C. 
6.2.1.3 Laboratory Thermal Conductivity 
Four thermal conductivity tests and nine thermal expansion tests were performed (CRWMS 
M&O 1996 [101428]). The specimens tested represent Topopah Spring welded tuff specimens 
from the TSw2 thermal-mechanical unit and the Tptpmn lithostratigraphic unit. Cores from 
boreholes drilled into the SHT test block were used to prepare specimens for both mechanical 
and thermal properties testing in the laboratory. 
The SHT Laboratory measured thermal conductivity may be found in the Input-DTN 
SNL22080196001.001 [109722]. 
6.2.1.3.1 Results: Laboratory Thermal Conductivity 
Thermal conductivity data are tabulated in Table 6.2.1.3-1. The mean thermal conductivity and 
standard deviation about the mean are given at each temperature. It appears that temperature 
dependence on thermal conductivity is small. The sharp increase in thermal conductivity at 70C 
reflects a change in instrumentation at that temperature. 
6.2.1.3.2 Measurement Uncertainty: Laboratory Thermal Conductivity 
Uncertainty in the laboratory measurement of thermal conductivity includes heterogeneity in the 
rock sample, temperature and insulator control, moisture determination, temperature effects, 
changes in instrumentation, and machine calibration. Most of these uncertainties are 
unquantifiable. In the case of machine calibration, if the error reached 4%, then it was 
recalibrated (CRWMS M&O 1996 [101428], p. 3-6). 
6.2.2 SHT Hydrological Measurements 
To assess the thermal-hydrologic processes in the SHT, the spatial distribution and the temporal 
variations of the moisture content in the rock mass were monitored. Electrical resistance 
tomography (ERT), ground penetrating radar (GPR), and neutron logging were used to monitor 
the moisture content. Air permeability was measured periodically to assess the changes in the 
fracture permeability during the test. Core samples collected from the SHT region were tested in 
the laboratory for some hydrological properties, such as porosity, density, and moisture retention 
curves. These will be presented in the following corresponding sections. 
Detailed discussion of SHT hydrological measurements is documented in Sections 6.3 and 8 of 
the Single Heater Test Final Report (CRWMS M&O 1999 [129261]). Input-DTNs and Output- 
DTNs for SHT hydrological measurements are presented in Tables 4-2 and 6.2-1, respectively. 
6.2.2.1 Electrical Resistance Tomography (ERT) 
This section describes ERT surveys made during the SHT heating and cooling phases to map the 
changes in moisture content caused by heating. Of particular interest is the formation and 
movement of condensate within the fractured rock mass. Figure 6.2-2 in Section 6.2 shows the

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.2-6 September 2002 
relative position of the ERT (hydrological) boreholes in the SHT. Four inclined boreholes (24 
27), forming a plane perpendicular to the heater axis, were used to position electrodes around the 
region of interest; this plane intersects the heater near its midpoint. Twenty-eight electrodes, 
equally spaced within the four boreholes, were used to conduct ERT surveys around the heater. 
The electrode spacing was about 30 cm with the electrodes grouted in the boreholes. Section 8.5 
of the Single Heater Test Final Report (CRWMS M&O 1999 [129261]) presents the ERT in 
detail. All of the SHT ERT data can be found in the TDMS under the following Input-DTNs: 
LL970101004244.026 [158281], LL970505404244.031 [148609], LL971002904244.044 
[158286], and LL980105204244.049 [148610]. 
6.2.2.1.1 Results: ERT 
The discussion of the ERT data reduction can be found in Section 6.1.2.1.1. The saturation 
estimates produced by data reduction model 2, which assumes that the primary pathway of the 
electrical current is through the double layer (Section 6.1.2.1.1), are presented below. The 
interpretation of ERT results of the SHT are shown in Figures 6.2.2.1-1 and 6.2.2.1-2, for the 
heating phase and the cooling phase respectively. The drying and wetting regions in these figures 
are based on hand tracings made over the model 2 saturation estimates. 
In general, the outline of the drying and wetting regions roughly coincide with saturations equal 
to 70% or less for the drying zone and 98% or more for the wetting zone. A significant region of 
drying is present around the heater. The dry zone is not centered on the heater and certainly is 
not symmetric about the heater. The pattern suggests a distribution of moisture that is strongly 
controlled by fractures. As time increases, the drying zone appears to propagate upward, 
especially after 219 days of heating; also, the minimum saturation estimate was near 10 percent. 
During the cooling phase, the dry zone around the heater appears to remain relatively stable; an 
exception to this observation is the result from September 25, 1997, which showed a change in 
the dry zone near the heaters location. At the end of the cooling phase, the image (December 17, 
1997) still shows a clear dry zone around the heater and significant wetting regions on the lower 
left flank of the heater. 
6.2.2.1.2 Measurement Uncertainty: ERT 
Many factors may contribute to the uncertainty in the saturation changes in the rock mass 
estimated from ERT. The measurements of the voltage and current at the electrodes are fairly 
accurate. More importantly, the saturation estimates presented here are impacted by one or more 
of the following factors: 
. The accuracy of the temperature maps in the vertical direction is limited by the sparse 
vertical coverage of the temperature sensors. Errors in the interpolated/extrapolated 
temperature maps will result in erroneous saturation estimates. 
. The presence of metal in the SHT block such as the heater resulted in measurement 
interference. 
. Other uncertainty factors that impact the ERT are similar to those listed in Section 
6.1.2.1.3.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.2-7 September 2002 
6.2.2.2 Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) 
This section describes the borehole radar tomography experiment conducted in the SHT block. In 
the borehole radar method, high frequency electromagnetic signals are transmitted from modified 
GPR antennas in one borehole through subsurface material to a receiving antenna in another 
borehole. Moisture content in the rock strongly influences the propagation of the signal, i.e., 
whether it travels at a high or low velocity or whether it is highly attenuated. The high dielectric 
permittivity of waterin contrast to dry rocktypically results in greatly reduced signal 
velocities. The cross-borehole transmitted signals may be represented as multiple raypaths 
crossing through the zone of interest. If sufficient raypaths are recorded, a tomographic image 
may be obtained through computer processing. The processed tomogram, containing the transit 
time (which depends on the wave velocity), and the amplitude (which depends on the wave 
attenuation), offers a high-resolution approach to monitoring the thermally induced spatial 
redistribution of the moisture content within the rock mass. The effect of temperature on radar 
measurements and its impact on moisture content estimation is included in the processing 
methodology. 
The borehole radar field surveys were conducted in boreholes 15, 17, 22, and 23 (see Section 
6.2, Figure 6.2-2). These same boreholes are used for neutron logging as discussed in the 
following Section 6.2.3. Boreholes 22 and 23 are collared from the Observation Drift and 
boreholes 15 and 17 are collared from the Thermal-Mechanical Alcove Extension. The boreholes 
are drilled several degrees off horizontal into the drift, cased with a Teflon liner and grouted into 
place. Each pair of boreholes defines a two-dimensional plane transverse to the heater assembly 
at mid-length and trending towards this assembly. In the case of boreholes 15 and 17, this plane 
actually extends across the strike of the heater. This is not the case with boreholes 22 and 23, 
which stop just short of the heater. 
A pulse EKKO 100 radar system was used for the radar data acquisition in the SHT. Section 8.3 
of the Single Heater Test Final Report (CRWMS 1999 [129261]) presents the GPR data 
acquisition in detail. Five separate surveys were performed using the borehole pairs. The first 
data set was acquired on August 22, 1996 before the heater was turned on (time = T0). Three 
data sets were acquired during heating: on January 15, 1997, 3 months after heating began (T1); 
on March 12, 1997, 5 months after heating began (T2); and on May 29, 1997, 9 months after 
heating and 1 day into cooling (T3). The fifth data set was acquired on January 7, 1998, a little 
over 7 months after the heater was turned off (T4). The complete set of GPR data for borehole 
pair 15 to 171 can be found in the TDMS under Input-DTN LB980901123142.003 [119016]. 
The crosshole radar data collection was performed using two acquisition modes. The first was a 
Zero Offset Profile (ZOP), in which the transmitter and receiver antennas were positioned within 
the boreholes at equal depths such that there was no vertical offset. The second was a Multiple 
Offset Profile (MOP), in which the receiving antenna remained at a fixed depth while the 
transmitter antenna was moved incrementally in the second borehole. Each multiple offset 
profile constitutes a receiver gather. In the SHT surveys, the transmitter and receiver intervals 
1 Radar data for the SHT started out as a scoping study to test out feasibility of the method. When the data from 
borehole pair 22 to 23 were found similar to that from borehole pair 15 to 17, data acquisition in the former pair was 
stopped after the first three surveys.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.2-8 September 2002 
were located every 0.25 meters. Each of the necessary raypaths was collected and recorded for 
the subsequent tomographic processing. 
Over the course of the heater experiment, the radar system was operated by using identical 
acquisition parameters for each of the five field surveys. No adjustments, filters, or gains were 
applied to the stored raw data. Therefore, data acquisition (and hence data repeatability) was the 
same regardless of who operated the system and whenso long as the antenna configuration was 
the same. Data repeatability is tantamount to successful tomographic differencing and 
interpretation. Small deviations in experimental methodology at such close spacing can result in 
large discrepancies in data processing. 
Further, accurate travel times between the transmitter and receiver antennas must be obtained 
from the radar data to invert for the velocity structure between boreholes. Hence, it is important 
to know the precise time when the transmitter fires (known as zero time). An accurate measure 
of zero time throughout the surveys was obtained by direct airwave measurements (the signal 
from transmitter antenna to receiver antenna in air) with the antennas held together in air and at 
the borehole collars in air. 
6.2.2.2.1 Results: GPR 
The boreholes 15 and 17 are 0.785 meters apart at their collars at the alcove wall and deviate to 
approximately 4.0 meters at their endpoints while remaining in the same plane. Accurate 
coordinates for each transmitter and receiver point (which are at 0.25-meter intervals) were 
determined using the surveyed borehole coordinates. Each multiple offset profile constitutes a 
receiver gather (one receiver depth and many transmitter depths), and a series of these gathers 
are used to construct tomographic images. 
Figure 6.2.2.2-1 shows two typical receiver gathers for the 15-17 borehole pair. The time scale 
along each trace is in nanoseconds. The travel times are picked at the moment of first arrival of 
energy, as marked for example in Figure 6.2.2.2-1. The input data (DTN LB980901123142.003 
[119016]) on the TDMS consist of the XYZ coordinates of the transmitter (borehole 15) and 
receiver (borehole 17) and the respective picked travel times for each survey. 
Figures 6.2.2.2-2AD show the velocity (in a 4.25 m . 8.5 m field in the plane of boreholes 15 
and 17) for the surveys taken 5, 7, 9, and 12 months after the start of heating. 
Changes in moisture content (rather than the absolute moisture content) are of primary interest. 
Therefore, it is useful to subtract the velocity values between two tomograms since velocities 
relate directly to liquid saturation. The baseline velocity tomogram is subtracted from the four 
post-heating velocity tomograms, producing four velocity-difference tomograms: T1-T0, T2-T0, 
T3-T0, and T4-T0. The difference tomograms are shown in Figures 6.2.2.2-3AD. The average 
absolute velocity value is about 0.1 m/ns, so a difference value of 0.01 m/ns is about a 10% 
change in velocity. The tomograms all show significant velocity increases and decreases. In 
general, radar velocities will decrease with temperature increase and increase with water content 
decrease. So an increase in velocity, as seen near the heater, shows that the velocity increase 
caused by drying (decrease in water content) is greater than the velocity decrease, associated 
with temperature increase.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.2-9 September 2002 
The derived tomograms are submitted as output associated with this report under Output-DTN 
LB0208GPRSHTCP, as identified in Table 6.2-1. 
6.2.2.2.2 Measurement Uncertainty: GPR 
The uncertainties associated with data acquisition and processing were small and were discussed 
in the previous sections. They include: 
. Relocation errors of the transmitters and receivers for each survey. The antenna were 
relocated to within one centimeter. 
. Zero time shift. The methodology employed reduced zero time errors to less than 0.5 
ns. 
. Travel time picking errors less than one sample, or 0.2 ns. The travel times must be 
picked very accurately: due to the short distance between boreholes, small errors in 
geometry and travel-time picks can have a significant effect on the results. The 
accuracy and repeatability of the picks is better than one sample (0.2 ns) over a 20 ns 
travel time. Despite the low signal amplitudes, a sufficient number of travel times could 
be picked to obtain an estimate of the two-dimensional interborehole velocity structure, 
based on an inversion as described in Peterson (1986 [101698]). Any error in picking is 
dependent primarily on the zero time adjustment and the repeatability of 
transmitter/receiver locations. These are both quite accurate. 
. Inversion errors, which can be calculated to be less than 0.03 ns. 
Though the results presented here in terms of difference in velocities are quite accurate, 
converting these results to water content and liquid saturation would involve assumptions 
regarding porosity, temperature, and locations of the radar survey. 
6.2.2.3 Neutron Logging 
Neutron logging is used to determine moisture content in rocks and soils. Neutron logging was 
used to monitor moisture content in boreholes 15, 17, 22, and 23 (see Figure 6.2-2) during the 
SHT. The neutron probe used in this test is a Campbell Pacific Nuclear model 503DR. A 3.81 cm 
(1.5 in.) diameter probe (serial number H37067677) was used for the SHT. Under ambient 
conditions, the sampling volume surrounding the probe has a diameter of approximately 15 cm; 
this volume diameter increases as moisture content decreases. 
For the SHT, a Teflon tube, with an RTD bundle mounted on its outside, was inserted into the 
boreholes and grouted into place. The Teflon tube permitted easy insertion, placement, and 
removal of the tool. Neutron counts were measured in each borehole at 10 cm intervals. 
Calibrations to known moisture contents were conducted for the neutron tool in a liner-RTDgrout 
assembly identical to that used in the SHT boreholes. Water content was calculated from 
the neutron counts using the calibration results. 
The pre-heating neutron loggings were conducted on August 21, 1996, prior to initiation of 
heating (August 26, 1996). A total of eighteen neutron loggings were conducted in each of the

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.2-10 September 2002 
four neutron boreholes in the SHT. Section 8.6 of the Single Heater Test Final Report carries 
detailed descriptions of the neutron logging. The SHT neutron data can be found in the TDMS 
under Input-DTN LL980106904244.051 [118963]. 
6.2.2.3.1 Results: Neutron Logging 
The neutron results are presented as the difference in water content between the heating/cooling 
measurements and the pre-heating baselines. Positive difference fraction volume water means 
gaining moisture content; negative difference fraction volume water means drying. To calculate 
water saturation, one can simply divide the fraction volume water content by the porosity. All of 
the neutron results were smoothed to remove some variations, but without changing their 
amplitudes very much. 
As examples of the neutron results in the SHT, Figures 6.2.2.3-1 and 6.2.2.3-2 show the 
difference fraction volume water in borehole 15 as a function of depth from the collar, at the end 
of the heating phase and the end of the cooling phase, respectively. The shortest distance 
between the borehole and the heater is about 2.07 m, at approximately 5.75 m from the collar of 
the borehole. The peak temperature in this borehole before the heater was de-energized was 
approximately 62C. The drying reached approximately 0.004 on May 21, 1997. During the 
cooling phase, the neutron results show a slight rewetting, especially at the closest point between 
the heater and the borehole. 
The neutron logging in the SHT region displayed changes in the moisture content in the heated 
rock mass. The degree of drying seemed in good correlation with the temperatures in the rock. 
The decreases in water content for the drying regions were small, because the neutron logging 
boreholes were not close to the heater. Rewetting was observed at a few localized regions during 
the cooling phase. The amplitude of the rewetting was small. 
6.2.2.3.2 Measurement Uncertainty: Neutron Logging 
The uncertainty of the neutron logging itself is about 0.1% volume water content. For clarity, 
saturation refers to percent of moisture in air voids (porosity) and water content refers to fraction 
of rock volume occupied by moisture. Measurements are sensitive to the presence of elements, 
such as chlorine and boron, that have large neutron-capture cross sections. The uncertainty 
caused by those minerals is difficult to assess, but probably not significant in the tuff. 
Under ambient conditions, the sampling volume surrounding the probe has a diameter of 
approximately 15 cm; this volume diameter increases as moisture content decreases. The neutron 
tool was calibrated to the exact liner-RTD bundle-grout, but variations in the grout volume along 
a borehole (possibly caused by changes in the borehole diameter, break-out regions, etc.) will 
introduce uncertainty in the measured results. It is assumed that the water content in the cured 
grout does not change during the course of the test. If the temperature causes the grout to dehydrate, 
it will affect the neutron results, because the neutron tool is very close to the grout 
column.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.2-11 September 2002 
6.2.2.4 Active Pneumatic Testing and Passive Hydrological Monitoring 
Pre-Heating Air Injection 
Characterization by means of air-injection tests, prior to the onset of heating, provides an 
estimate of the fracture permeability in the test block. Air-permeability testing in the SHT block 
was performed prior to the heating phase in boreholes 131 as shown in Figure 6.2-2. The preheating 
air injection data, which have been submitted under Input-DTN LB960500834244.001 
[105587], contain 47 files of pressure, temperature, and flow data from each air-injection test, 
located in TDMS data tables S97535_001 through S97535_047. Data include the change in 
pressure from initial pressure in each borehole (.kPa), as well as columns of data containing the 
injection flow rate (SLPM for standard liters per minute), the barometric pressure (kPa), the 
relative humidity (%), and temperature (.C). Permeabilities estimated from injections tests 
performed in a short straddle packer in borehole 6 are found in TDMS data table S97535_048. 
Permeabilities estimated from injection tests performed in SHT boreholes isolated a single 
pneumatic packer at the collar of the borehole are found in TDMS data table S97535_049. 
Heating/Cooling Air Injection and Passive Monitoring 
During the heating and subsequent cooling phase, air-injection tests were periodically performed 
in boreholes 16 and 18 to provide information on the changes in flow arising from coupled 
thermal-hydrological processes. In boreholes 16 and 18 are strings of four pneumatically inflated 
packers to isolate the borehole into different instrumented intervals, numbered from the closest to 
the collar of the borehole, 1, to the deepest, 4. Behind each packer are relative humidity, 
temperature, and pressure transducers. The eight instrumented intervals are referred to by 
borehole number followed by the instrument interval number, i.e., 18-3 is the third instrument 
cluster from the collar in borehole 18. Injection tests were performed in three zones: (1) zone 1 
between inflated packers 1 and 3 with packer 2 deflated, (2) zone 2 between inflated packers 2 
and 4 with packer 3 deflated, and (3) zone 3 between inflated packer 4 and borehole bottom with 
all packers inflated. Measurement data associated with the quarterly injection tests were 
submitted to the TDMS under the following Input-DTNs: LB970100123142.001 [158287], 
LB980120123142.008 [158280], LB970500123142.001 [158293], LB0204SHAIRK3Q.001 
[159543], and LB971000123142.001 [118965]. The heading of the data reports contains a 
description of the data in comma-separated format. 
When air-injection testing was not in progress, the packers in boreholes 16 and 18 were left 
inflated, and pressure, temperature, and relative humidity sensors were used for passive 
monitoring of the heater test. Passive monitoring data from August 1996 through December 1997 
can be found in the Input-DTN LB980901123142.002 [119009]. 
Post-cooling Air Injection Characterization and Tracer Tests 
Post-cooling characterization by air injection was done during the third and fourth weeks of 
January 1998. Of the original 31 SHT boreholes, only boreholes 1, 3, 6, 7, and 19 were available 
for post-cooling air-injection testing. The other 26 boreholes contained grouted instrumentation 
and were not accessible. The post-cooling characterization strategy was to duplicate the preheating 
characterization test conditions when feasible. Therefore, inflatable packers were

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.2-12 September 2002 
installed near the collar of boreholes 3, 6, 7, and 19 to depths identical to those of their preheating 
characterization positions. The hydrology boreholes 16 and 18 were already equipped 
with packer strings for the duration of the SHT and were not modified for post-cooling 
characterization. 
As part of the post-cooling characterization, gas tracer tests were conducted between borehole 1, 
the heater borehole, and boreholes 16 and 18. The purpose of the tracer tests was to gain a better 
understanding of the hydrological conditions that permitted rapid vapor transport from the heater 
borehole 1 vicinity into borehole 16 resulting in water accumulation in borehole 16. The gas 
tracer testing data, together with the post-cooling air-injection data, are located under the Input- 
DTN LB980901123142.001 [118999] in the TDMS. 
The results of the pneumatic tests and passive monitoring data will be briefly summarized in 
Section 6.2.2.4.1. For a more detailed description and discussion of the measurements and 
results, readers are referred to Sections 8.1 and 8.2 of the Single Heater Test Final Report 
(CRWMS M&O 1999 [129261]), and the references therein. The Output-DTN is listed in Table 
6.2-1. 
6.2.2.4.1 Results: Active Pneumatic Testing and Passive Hydrological Monitoring 
Estimated permeabilities from pre-heating air-injection tests have been calculated using Equation 
5.1-1 and appear in Tables 6.2.2.4-1 and 6.2.2.4-2. The three-orders-of-magnitude range in the 
permeability values can be attributed to flow through fractures of hierarchical scales, with the 
microfractures accounting for the lower values, and longer fractures (a few meters in extent) 
responsible for the higher values. 
Changes in the permeabilities for borehole 16 and 18 during heating and cooling are shown in 
Figure 6.2.2.4-1 as a ratio of transient permeabilities to pre-heating (baseline) value. For both 16- 
4 and 18-4, a decrease in permeability is shown after the initiation of heating, followed by an 
increase after heating has concluded. This decrease is interpreted as an increase in fracture liquid 
saturation, decreasing the relative gas-phase permeability. Similarly, the increase is attributed to 
the drainage of the water from the fractures. The increase between the baseline permeability and 
post-cooling estimates in the back zone of borehole 16 and 18 may result from lower fracture 
saturations after heating, because of the reduced saturation in the vicinity of the heater borehole, 
or to overall opening of fractures. 
Pressure, temperature, and relative humidity in boreholes 16 and 18 were continuously 
monitored during heating and cooling. Figures 6.2.2.4-2, 6.2.2.4-3, and 6.2.2.4-4 show the 
temperature, humidity and pressure data, respectively. The pressure buildup in sensor 16-4 
reflects accumulation of water in borehole 16 during the heating phase. A rise in pressure was 
discernable after only a few days of heating, indicating that water was rapidly mobilized from 
very near heater borehole 1 to 16-4. Each drop in pressure at 16-4 shown in Figure 6.2.2.4-4 data 
reflects the sampling of water that had accumulated in the borehole. 
Post cooling site characterization activities began in January 1998. Table 6.2.2.4-3 shows the 
post-cooling air-permeability values of various injection zones estimated using Equation 5.2-1. 
Table 6.2.2.4-4 shows a comparison of permeability estimates from pre-heating and post-cooling

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.2-13 September 2002 
measurements using data from injections into boreholes 3, 6, 7, 16, 18, and 19. Direct 
comparison is possible in these boreholes because of the identical pre-heating and post-cooling 
packer configurations. The post-cooling and pre-heating permeability values in these boreholes 
have the same order of magnitude. Furthermore, a study of the cross-borehole steady-state 
pressure response show that they are also comparable under pre-heating and post-cooling 
conditions (i.e., the data do not reveal that the pneumatic connectivity between the boreholes 
tested had been significantly altered by heating and cooling). The ratios of post to pre-heating 
permeability values (Table 6.2.2.4-4), however, show that a consistent upward trend in the 
permeability values from pre-heating to post-cooling. This increase in permeability, ranging 
from about 20% to a factor of 3.5, may be attributed to opening of fractures from heating. 
Post-cooling air-injection tests were also utilized to test the hypothesis that a fast path for vapor 
transport exists between heater borehole 1 and borehole 16, and that it was responsible for the 
accumulation of condensed water in borehole 16, zone 3. With this in mind, air-permeability 
tests were carried out in a multizone configuration for boreholes 1, 16, and 18. Specifically, 
injection was conducted in six consecutive zones in the heater borehole 1, and the cross-borehole 
pressure response in the zones behind the 4th packer (referred to as zone 3 earlier) in boreholes 
16 and 18 were measured to identify plausible fast-path connections. Upon conclusion of air 
permeability tests, gas tracer tests were also performed between the heater borehole 1 and 
boreholes 16 and 18 to investigate the possible presence of fast paths for vapor transport. 
For the gas tracer tests, zone 3, behind the 4th packer in boreholes 16 and 18, has chosen as the 
tracer withdrawal interval, and borehole 1 was chosen as the tracer injection borehole. Based on 
the results of the post-cooling air-permeability tests, two intervals in borehole 1 that gave the 
largest cross-borehole pressure response were selected for gas tracer injections. The first interval, 
extending from 3.83 m to 4.42 m from the collar of the borehole, produced a strong pressure 
response in zone 3 of borehole 16 and a much weaker response in zone 3 of borehole 18. The 
second interval, between 5.05 m and 5.64 m as measured from (the collar of the borehole), 
produced a stronger response in zone 3 of borehole 18 than in zone 3 of borehole 16. 
The perpendicular layout between borehole 1 and boreholes 16 and 18, which significantly 
complicates transport geometry, made the test results less amenable to detailed transport 
analysis. The purpose of the tracer testing was to gain an understanding of the rapid gas flux that 
gave rise to the observed presence of water (condensate) into the back of borehole 16, as 
opposed to borehole 18, from which no condensate had been sampled. Thus, it was determined to 
focus on the first arrival of tracer and only qualitatively examine the rate at which cumulative 
mass recovery occurred. 
The results of five gas tracer tests are shown in Table 6.2.2.4-5. Tracer transport from zone 3 of 
borehole 1 to zone 3 of borehole 16 was extremely rapid, with 100% tracer recovery occurring 
within 30 minutes from injection. First arrival of tracer to zone 3 of borehole 18 took more than 
twice as long and 100% tracer recovery took approximately 15 hours. The differences in the 
transport times and recovery efficiencies suggests that the path between zone 3 of borehole 18 
and borehole 1 is much more tortuous and indirect than the path between zone 3 of borehole 16 
and borehole 1. This, together with the results of air-permeability tests, support the hypothesis of 
a direct fracture connection between borehole 1 and zone 3 of borehole 16 that allows for rapid

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.2-14 September 2002 
vapor transport. This direct fracture connection was subsequently confirmed by visual inspection 
of the over cores of borehole 16. 
6.2.2.4.2 Measurement Uncertainty: Active Pneumatic Testing and Passive 
Hydrological Monitoring 
Assumptions about the validity and accuracy of the acquired data of humidity, temperature, gas 
flowrate and pressure vary, depending on the sensor and the method by which the sensor is used 
to perform the measurement. Accuracy as used here is defined as combined nonlinearity, 
hysteresis, and nonrepeatability. The data acquisition equipment used to record the sensor signal 
can introduce an inaccuracy into the measurement of the sensor output. However, here the 
accuracy and repeatability of the acquisition system (Keithley model 2001 Digital Multimeters 
were used) far exceeds the limitations of the sensors being employed. The accuracy of the 
Keithley 2001 Digital Multimeter is approximately 25 ppm of the full scale output (FSO) for 
voltage measurements and 56 ppm of the FSO for resistance measurements. Limitations of the 
data acquisition systems can therefore be neglected in further discussion. 
In the pre-heating and post-heating air-injection testing, pressure measurements were performed 
using Setra Model 204C pressure sensors. These sensors have an accuracy of 0.2% FSO. 
Borehole 16 and 18 sensors used Endevco Model 8520A-50 sensors, which also have an 
accuracy of 0.2% FSO. However, heating/cooling measurements of pressure by the eight 
Endevco sensors installed in the heated region indicated a significant thermal shift, ranging from 
1% to 1.5% over the temperature range 10.C to 150.C. Vaisala Model HMP235-A humidity 
sensors were used to monitor temperature and relative humidity (RH) within boreholes 16 and 
18. The humidity measurement has a tolerance of .1.0% RH below 90% RH and an accuracy of 
.2.0% RH above 90% RH. The temperature measurement performed with the HMP235-A has an 
accuracy of .0.2.C. Sierra Instruments Model 840 Mass Flow Controllers (MFC) were used to 
monitor gas injection flow rates. Sierra Instruments specifies an accuracy of .1.0% FSO. 
However, in thermal testing field conditions, the accuracy is derated to .10.0% FSO. This 
derating of performance reflects the sensitivity of the MFC to the shock, vibration, and dust that 
it is subjected to during underground testing. 
Short circuiting of gas flow caused by the high density of boreholes within the test block may 
increase the estimated permeability. The degree to which borehole short circuiting of fractures 
influences the estimated permeability is difficult to estimate. However, the range of values 
obtained here does not significantly differ from values obtained in the Drift Scale Test (Section 
6.3.2.4) or from surface-based boreholes. 
6.2.2.5 Laboratory ParametersSaturation, Porosity, Density, Moisture Retention 
Curves 
Pre-Heating 
As part of the pre-heating characterization, laboratory measurements of saturation, porosity, bulk 
density, particle density, and gravimetric water content for cores from the SHT area were 
conducted. These studies aim to determine the amount of pore water available for evaporation 
and boiling during the heating phase. Hydrological laboratory measurements were carried out for

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.2-15 September 2002 
grab samples from wet excavation of the Observation Drift, and for cores, wrapped in sealed 
packets after coring from three wet-drilled boreholes (boreholes 1, 6, 5) in the SHT block. The 
grab samples, nominally 12  12  6 in size, were broken open with a jackhammer to retrieve 
samples (200 to 700 g in mass) from the interior regions away from drying surfaces. The results 
of these measurements have been submitted to the TDMS under DTN LB970500123142.003 
[131500]. Detailed discussion of these measurements can be found in the Single Heater Test 
Final Report (CRWMS M&O 1999 [129261]). 
In addition to the above parameters, moisture retention curves were also measured, at 
temperatures of 25.1C, 49.6C and 93.7C for 11 SHT core samples from boreholes 20 (CHE-1) 
and 21 (CHE-2). Prior to the retention-curve measurements, the dry bulk density, the saturated 
bulk density and porosity of these samples were determined at room temperature. The results of 
these measurements are extracted from a report by Lin et al. (2002 [159099]). Data for 25.1C 
before heating can be found in the TDMS under Input-DTN LL970709004244.035 [127312]. 
Post-cooling 
A number of boreholes were dry-drilled following the termination of the cooling phase of the 
SHT for post-cooling characterization. In particular, protected (wrapped and sealed) cores from 
three dry-drilled boreholes (boreholes 199, 200, 201) were tested for porosity, density, and water 
content or liquid saturation. The locations of these protected cores (Table 6.2-3) were designed to 
pass through both the anticipated dry-out and condensing regions developing in the SHT 
block as a result of the heating. While the quantities measured and the methodology of these 
post-cooling laboratory measurements remain the same as their pre-heating counterparts, the 
focus here in the post-cooling effort is substantially different. In the pre-heating results, the intent 
is to estimate an average initial liquid saturation of the matrix cores; in the post-cooling results, 
the focus is on the change from their initial value as a result of thermal-hydrological coupled 
processes, and more importantly, the spatial location of the cores (with respect to the heater) 
where changes have occurred. The data have been submitted to the TDMS under the Input-DTN 
LB980901123142.006 [119029]. 
6.2.2.5.1 Results: Laboratory ParametersSaturation, Porosity, Density, Moisture 
Retention Curves 
Pre-Heating 
The measurements of wet-drilled cores from boreholes 1, 6, and 5 of the SHT are shown in Table 
6.2.2.5-1. These laboratory measurements were conducted following the Technical 
Implementation Procedure YMP-LBNL-TIP-AFT 2.0. Samples were placed in containers with 
tight-fitting lids and immediately weighed. The samples were subsequently oven-dried at a 
temperature between 100.C to 110.C, until they reached a constant weight (from several 
weighings). They were then placed in a desiccator, cooled, and weighed to determine the 
gravimetric water content. The samples were then water-saturated in a vacuum chamber, after 
which they were weighed following the method of Archimedes (i.e., immersed in air and water) 
to determine the weight under conditions of full saturation and the sample bulk volume. 
Knowledge of the dry weight, saturated weight, and sample bulk volume were used to calculate 
bulk density, porosity, and particle density.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.2-16 September 2002 
Table 6.2.2.5-1 shows that saturation is approximately 95%. The variability of rock properties is 
evident. In the core processing procedure, any observation of factors potentially affecting the 
results is recorded. The abbreviated description for each core with abnormal features is included 
in the table footnotes. This soft information forms the basis for distinguishing cores that yield 
reliable weight measurement from cores that give potentially abnormal and inaccurate 
measurements. Large fractures with porous infill material generally introduce greater inaccuracy 
into the weight measurement. In the resaturation step needed to determine total pore volume with 
cores stored in water, debris is sometimes observed. Cyclic resaturation steps are used to 
quantify and to compensate for solid losses. 
The data from two grab samples from the wet excavation of the Observation Drift near the SHT 
block are shown in Table 6.2.2.5-2. Five subsamples were tested. 
One of the subsamples had an 81% saturation, while the saturation of the other four subsamples 
exceeded 94%. These measurements provide the only site-specific data for liquid saturation at 
the onset of the SHT. Consequently, those values resulted in using 92% initial saturation in 
modeling of the SHT. 
Bulk density and porosity of the 11 core samples intended for moisture retention curves are 
shown in Table 6.2.2.5-3. These specimens have no obvious large cavities and inhomogeneous 
inclusions. The specimens were dried in a vacuum oven at a temperature of about 35.C until 
their weights became constant for several days. Dry bulk density was calculated by dividing the 
dry weight with the specimen volume. The specimens were than saturated with water under 
vacuum condition and remained in water until their weights were constant for several days. 
Saturated bulk density was calculated from the saturated weights. Porosity was calculated by 
subtracting the dry density from the saturated density, and dividing by the density of water. The 
average porosity for these samples is 11.1 1.1%. 
To start the moisture retention curve measurement in the wetting cycle at room temperature, the 
specimens were dried and placed in the relative humidity (RH) chamber at about 25C and 20% 
RH. The sample weights were determined daily. When the weights reached a constant value for 
several days, it was assumed that equilibrium was established, and the sample weights were used 
to calculate the saturation level at that RH condition. Saturation was calculated by comparing the 
measured weights with dry weights and taking into account porosity. Then the RH was increased 
to 35%, and the procedures were repeated. This was repeated for the higher RH levels at 50, 65, 
80, and 95%. After this, the RH was decreased according to the following steps: 80, 65, 50, 35, 
and 20% to start the measurements in the drying cycle at room temperature. The maximum 
saturation achieved at the highest RH was between 30% and 40% (see below). The process was 
then repeated for the drying portion of the measurement. This cycle of measurement was 
repeated at different temperatures, 50C and 94C, without the measurements at 35 and 65% RH. 
Moisture retention curves of the SHT specimens at a temperature of 25.1.C are shown in Figure 
6.2.2.5-1. Only the average properties are shown for clarity. The averages are the mean 
saturation and matric potential of all 11 specimens. The error bars for saturation are the standard 
deviation from the average saturation at a matric potential level of all samples. There is very 
little hysteresis at all temperatures. The temperature cycle has a very small effect on moisture

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.2-17 September 2002 
retention: the post-temperature-cycle data show slightly smaller moisture retention than the first 
room-temperature data. 
The moisture-retention curves are dependent on temperature. The effect is not significant 
between 25.C and 50.C, but seems to be significant between 50.C and 94.C. The temperature 
effect on the moisture-retention curves is always to decrease the level of saturation at a matric 
potential level with increasing temperature. The SHT samples show greater moisture retention 
than the DST samples (as shown in Section 6.3.2.5) at all temperatures. The difference decreases 
slightly with increasing temperature. The maximum saturation that can be reached in those 
samples depends on temperature. At 25.1C, the maximum saturation achieved is about 36%. At 
49.6C, this increases to about 39%, but at 93.7.C it decreases to about 29%. 
Post-cooling 
Boreholes 199, 200, and 201 were dry drilled after cooling for the purpose of evaluating 
moisture movement. Figure 6.2.2.5-2 plots the liquid saturation of all cores tested, in their 
respective locations, in XZ view. Locations of the cores along the borehole are identified by the 
last two digits of their Sample Management Facility (SMF) ID, shown in the legend. The two 
dashed circles, with radius of 1 m and 3 m respectively from the heater, delineate the anticipated 
drying zone (approximately within the inner circle), and the wetting region (between the two 
circles). The radial symmetry does not account for gravity drainage of the condensate, hence 
borehole 201 was drilled at a steep angle in order to access rock at depth over 3 m below the 
heater horizon, with the intention of investigating the importance of condensate drainage via the 
fractures. 
Table 6.2.2.5-4 presents laboratory-determined saturation, porosity, and particle density. 
Average porosity and particle density values are given at the end of the table. An average value 
for liquid saturation is not a meaningful parameter in these post-cooling cores, because liquid 
saturation of the cores reflects the thermal-hydrological processes that have taken place in the 
SHT, and their importance lies in their spatial variability with respect to the heat source. The 
porosity of three core samples (local ID H-1, H-22, H-27) is exceptionally high, and is attributed 
to visible evidence of fractures. In turn, the liquid saturation of these samples would be less 
reliable. 
Saturation for cores along borehole 201 is relatively uniform. Excluding the two samples with 
large porosity, liquid saturation for all cores along borehole 201 is within 2% of their average 
86%. For the cores along boreholes 199 and 200, note the following: (a) drying due to heat has 
occurred near the heater, as evidenced by the lower liquid saturation of cores within the 1 m 
radius from the heater; (b) the liquid saturations in the anticipated condensing zone between 
two circles are generally lower than those values in borehole 201; and (c) the liquid saturation 
seems to be higher below the heater horizon than above. These observations are consistent with a 
scenario stipulating that condensate is not held in the matrix (thus elevating its liquid saturation) 
but is drained through fractures of hierarchical scales. Drainage through the microscopic 
fractures account for the slightly drier cores above the heater horizon in borehole 199 than below 
the heater horizon in borehole 200. Drainage through larger fractures extending a few meters 
accounts for the overall wetter cores in borehole 201 than those in the condensing zones in 
boreholes 199 and 200.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.2-18 September 2002 
6.2.2.5.2 Measurement Uncertainty: Laboratory ParametersSaturation, Porosity, 
Density, Moisture Retention Curves 
Saturation, Porosity, Bulk Density 
Factors that can affect accuracy of laboratory measurements include 
. Ability to account for all moisture in the rock sample because of the condensation of 
water on walls of core container. These are estimated by absorbing water from the 
container with a paper cloth and weighing the cloth. 
. Large fractures and cores with infill material generally introduce greater inaccuracy in 
the weight measurements. 
. Averages and standard deviations introduce a measure of data uncertainty. 
Also, in Tables 6.2.2.5-1 and 6.2.2.5-2, observations of factors that may potentially affect the 
results are included in the table footnotes. 
Moisture Retention Curves 
A balance with a sensitivity of 0.01 mg calibrated to a traceable standard was used to weigh the 
samples. Saturation was calculated by comparing weights with dry weights and taking into 
account porosity. One difficulty was the establishment of steady weight values at the highest 
humidities, particularly at high temperatures. The reasons for this difficulty are that the RH is 
difficult to control at the highest settings and the weight of the samples is more sensitive to 
changes in RH at the highest settings. Refinement of the control parameters on the humidity 
chambers aided in solving this problem. 
The measurement uncertainty involved in determining the moisture-retention curves include the 
measurements of weights, relative humidity, and sample size. The sample dimensions are used to 
determine sample wet and dry densities. It is estimated that the thickness of the sample can be 
determined to  0.005 mm and diameter to  0.05 mm. For the samples used here, this results in 
an error in sample volume of ~ 0.3%. The uncertainty in dry weight is estimated to be ~0.00002 
g and for wet weight ~0.0001 g. The error in the wet weight is higher than that of the dry 
condition because of the difficulty in achieving and maintaining saturation levels of 100%. These 
uncertainties result in errors in dry and wet densities of ~0.3%. 
When repetitive measurements are made on samples over a period of several days, such as the 
determination of weights at a specified RH, for example, the uncertainty in the measurement is 
often less than the statistical uncertainty in the mean of the measured parameter. In such cases, 
the error is taken as one standard deviation of the mean. The errors in saturation determined at 
specific temperature and RH are estimated to vary from ~0.07 to 0.5% water saturation which 
includes errors associated with dry and wet densities discussed above. Thus, the relative 
uncertainty is estimated to be between ~1 and 10%, with a 12% error most common. 
The uncertainty in the relative humidity is approximately  2% RH. When propagated through 
Kelvins equation to matric potential, the absolute uncertainties are fairly low, but the relative

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.2-19 September 2002 
uncertainties are high at the matric potentials closest to zero (as much as 200% at a matric 
potential of -1.36  2.73 MPa). 
6.2.3 SHT Mechanical Measurements 
The discussion of mechanical data for the SHT has been divided into several subsections, based 
on the type of measurement: 
. Multi-point borehole extensometer (MPBX) displacements were measured within the 
rock mass surrounding the SHT. These measurements were used to evaluate numerical 
models related to thermal-hydrological-mechanical coupling as well as to provide data 
for determination of rock mass thermal expansion. 
. Wire and tape extensometer measurements were used to measure movement of the free 
surfaces of the SHT block. 
. Borehole jack tests were performed to measure rock mass modulus at ambient and 
elevated temperatures. 
. Rock bolt loading tests were performed to evaluate qualitatively the effects of elevated 
temperature on rock bolt performance. 
. Laboratory properties/parameters such as elastic modulus, Poisson's ratio, and thermal 
expansion of the Tptpmn and the Invar rods used for the MPBXs were measured. 
. Field properties/parametersincluding rock-mass thermal expansion estimations from 
the MPBX displacement data, were measured. 
Detailed descriptions of all SHT mechanical measurements may be found in Section 9 of the 
Single Heater Test Final Report (CRWMS M&O 1999 [129261]). Input-DTNs and Output- 
DTNs for SHT mechanical measurements are listed in Tables 4-2 and 6.2-1, respectively. 
6.2.3.1 MPBX Displacements 
Displacements were measured both within and on the surfaces of the SHT block. These 
measurements support numerical model evaluations related to thermal-mechanical-hydrological 
coupling and also provide data for determination of rock-mass thermal expansion. All 
displacements reported in this document follow the convention of extension positive. Four 
boreholes were instrumented with MPBXs: three boreholes drilled parallel to the heater axis and 
one borehole drilled perpendicular to the heater axis. The MPBXs include six or seven anchors 
spaced along the length of the borehole. Displacements were measured using high temperature 
linear variable differential transducers (LVDTs) and vibrating wire displacement transducers. 
Wire extensometers and tape extensometer pins were installed on the three free surfaces of the 
SHT block (see Figures 6.2.3.1-1 and 6.2.3.1-2). Note that the legend for the abbreviations in 
these two figures is as follows: BX is multiple-point borehole extensometer, WX and WXM is 
wire extensometers, RB-LC is rockbolt load cell, and BJ is borehole jack. The wire 
extensometers consist of spring-loaded linear potentiometers mounted on brackets welded to

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.2-20 September 2002 
steel rebar segments. These segments are grouted into the rock near the top of the SHT block at 
six locations (two on each of the three free surfaces of the SHT block). These surface 
displacements are intended to augment the displacement data collected from the MPBXs and to 
provide qualitative control of the SHT free surfaces to support future modeling efforts. 
Detailed discussion of the SHT displacements is presented in Section 9 and 11.2 of the Single 
Heater Test Final Report (CRWMS M&O 1999 [129261]). SHT displacement data can be found 
in the TDMS under the Input-DTNs: SNF35110695001.008 [113812], SNF35110695001.009 
[113819], and LL980109904243.015 [158299]. Because of the abundance of SHT displacement 
data, only representative discussion and graphics are provided. All displacement data and 
graphics can be accessed in the Output-DTN identified in Table 6.2-1. 
6.2.3.1.1 Results: MPBX Displacements 
Only representative discussion and graphics are presented here. Figure 6.2.3.1-3 shows 
displacement data for MPBX-3, which is located approximately 1.5 m from the heater, above 
and to the right (south). The data from MPBX-3 show an increase in gage length (extension) for 
all anchor positions through about the first 70 days. From 70 to about 100 days, all anchors 
exhibit a gradual decrease in gage length. After about 100 days, all anchors except MPBX-3-1 
reverse trend and increase extension through the second quarter of heating. Anchor MPBX-3-1 
continues the relative compression from day 100 through about day 180, when it experiences a 
sudden extensional jump followed by continued extension throughout the fourth quarter of 
heating. The extensional jump at about day 180 is seen only in anchor MPBX-3-1; therefore, it is 
likely that it results from discrete movement along a fracture or system of fractures located 
between anchors MPBX-3-2 and MPBX-3-1. This region corresponds to similar presumed 
behavior near anchor MPBX-1-1 (MPBX-1) near day 210. The change in slope for most of the 
anchor responses after about 70 days may be the result of matrix thermal expansion closing 
existing fractures, thus limiting additional thermally driven displacements until a greater volume 
of rock is heated. Thus, three-dimensional confinement effects may influence the response of 
some anchors. 
The cooldown data for MPBX-3 are also included in Figure 6.2.3.1-3 (cooling starts at day 275). 
Four gages in MPBX-3 are operational; gages MPBX-3-4 and MPBX-3-5 are suspected to have 
failed from unknown causes during heating. MPBX-3 exhibits step-wise decreases in all 
operational gages during cooldown. As with MPBX-1, this type of behavior may be suggestive 
of stick-slip type behavior resulting from normal and/or shear extension/compression of 
fractures in the cooling rock mass. This type of behavior should not be unexpected in a fractured 
rock mass. 
Wire and tape extensometer pins were placed on the three free surfaces of the SHT block (see 
Figures 6.2.3.1-1 and 6.2.3.1-2). Because the measurements are made from short pins installed 
near the rock surface, they can be influenced by discrete block movement. All the wire 
extensometer stations show displacement changes of over several millimeters, with the exception 
of WX-4, which experienced displacements of less than 1 mm throughout the test. The data from 
the wire extensometers are provided in tabular form in Table 6.2.3.1-1. The wire extensometer 
data exhibit closure by the end of heating, with the exception of WX-2 (located on the west face 
of the SHT block, about 2 m to the left of the heater) which exhibits a small extension of less

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.2-21 September 2002 
than 1 mm through the end of heating. Other wire extensometer stations (such as WX-3 and 
WX-5, which are located on the south and north face of the block 3.7 mm from the Thermal- 
Mechanical Alcove) show over 20 mm of closure at the end of the fourth quarter. 
The data from the manual tape-extensometer measurements are given in Table 6.2.3.1-2. The 
data show that the horizontal cross-drift measurements are largest for WXM-1, WXM-2, and 
WXM-3, with all measurements compressive (i.e., shortening of the gage length). In other 
words, the surface pins are moving away from the SHT block in all cases. These displacements 
are consistent with the gross displacements measured using the MPBXs. In addition, the tape 
extensometer results for WXM-2 are consistent with the large displacements measured by the 
wire extensometer station WX-2. This suggests gross surface displacements near the surface of 
the SHT block to the left of the heater. It is likely that either or both of the WXM-2 pins are 
located in a loose block of rock, which appears to have loosened almost immediately during the 
SHT. The subsequent data suggest that the block(s) stabilized somewhat, with only minor 
additional displacement after September 24, 1996. 
6.2.3.1.2 Measurement Uncertainty: MPBX Displacements 
There are several potential sources for measurement uncertainty in the displacement 
measurements presented in this section. These uncertainties, quantifiable and nonquantifiable, 
are listed below: 
Quantifiable 
. The accuracy of the instrumentation itself. The gage range and accuracy of SHT 
displacement-related instrumentation are presented in Table 6.2.3.1-3. 
. The conversion of the electrical output to engineering units. The uncertainty from these 
equations and the round-off error inherent in the data conversion are negligible. 
Non-quantifiable 
. Electrical interference, such as spurious signals from power surges, can cause lowmagnitude 
noise, unexplained meandering in the data, or high-magnitude spikes. 
. Unidentified sensor or MPBX assembly stability issues, which have caused a few 
LVDTs or vibrating wire gages to either produce bad data for an extended period of 
time before returning "good" data, or to have an unexplained shift in magnitude while 
maintaining expected rates of behavior on both sides of the shift. 
. The physical location of the gages in the test region are difficult to precisely determine. 
The location uncertainty is particularly important in regions of high temperature 
gradient, of which hydrological and thermal expansion behavior are thought to be 
strong functions for certain temperature ranges. 
. The uncertainty related to the choice of method for computing thermal expansion of 
Invar rods, based on measured temperatures along MPBXs, is difficult to estimate. 
Piecewise linear discretization using average temperature values and a 4th-order

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.2-22 September 2002 
polynomial for thermal expansion as a function of temperature were used for the SHT. 
The choice of another method (e.g., an integral function along the length of the rods) 
requires different assumptions that may be as reasonable as the method chosen. The 
magnitude of any discretization error is likely not large enough to affect the general 
trends in thermal-mechanical deformation of the rock illustrated by the data. 
. Instruments can degrade or fail. 
. Anchors can slip (considered possible but unlikely). 
. The temperature change near the anchor heads could affect LVDT calibration 
constants. This uncertainty is anticipated to be negligible. 
6.2.3.2 Borehole Jack 
Borehole jack tests were performed in ESF-TMA-BJ-1 (borehole 19). Detailed discussion of the 
borehole jack tests is presented in Sections 9.2 and 11.2 of the Single Heater Test Final Report 
(CRWMS M&O 1999 [129261]). Because the rock-mass modulus measured using the borehole 
jack is directional (perpendicular to the borehole), an estimate of horizontal modulus anisotropy 
was not possible. It is likely that some anisotropy in modulus exists locally because of 
differences in fracture stiffness for each set of fractures present in the SHT block. Also, it is 
likely that the rock mass modulus varies across the repository block. These measurements, which 
included 15 ambient and 10 elevated-temperature measurements, were taken at five locations 
within the testing borehole at nine different times during the heating and cooling phases of the 
SHT. Consequently, the effects of temperature on rock-mass modulus was examined. 
Borehole jack data may be found in Input-DTN: SNF35110695001.010 [158300]. 
6.2.3.2.1 Results: Borehole Jack 
The results from the borehole-jack testing show that the measured rock mass modulus ranges 
from about 3 to 23 Gpa where the higher values were generally associated with increases in 
temperature. The highest value is for the deepest measurement location in the borehole (~6.2 m 
from the collar). This location corresponds to roughly 0.33 m from the heater borehole, about 
1.5 m from the end of the heater. Measurement at this location approximately 110 days before 
and 190 days after resulted in moduli of 8.5 Gpa and 9.2 Gpa, respectively. This anonymously 
high value of 23 GPa may be due to measurement error. All the other borehole-jack data are 
relatively low, less than 12 GPa. 
These measured values at the SHT are considerably less than the intact modulus of about 
32.4 GPa measured on intact samples of the Topopah Spring welded tuff. The data presented in 
Table 6.2.3.2-1 include italicized results in which the two LVDT readings (far and near) differ by 
slightly greater than 0.02 in. at the maximum test pressure. According to American Society for 
Testing and Materials (ASTM) D4971-89 (p. 3) these data should be discarded because of 
uneven loading. The fractured nature of the rock surrounding the borehole made it difficult in 
some cases to set the borehole jack at those locations. However, the data presented represent 
only slight deviation from the ASTM D4971-89 (p. 3) criteria and are presented to qualitatively

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.2-23 September 2002 
assess modulus difference along borehole BJ-1. The italicized data should not be used in 
calculations requiring rock mass modulus. 
6.2.3.2.2 Measurement Uncertainty: Borehole Jack 
Measurement uncertainties in SHT borehole-jack measurements include those associated with 
accuracy and precision as tabulated in Table 6.2.3.1-3 and proximity to fractures. The borehole 
jack is better suited for local regions that are intact rather than fractured rock. Also, elevated 
temperatures, especially near peak temperatures in the SHT block, may affect the performance of 
the borehole jack. 
6.2.3.3 Rock-Bolt Load 
Eight rock-bolt load cells were installed on Williams B7X Hollow Core rock bolts as part of the 
SHT mechanical testing program. The objective was to evaluate qualitatively the effects of 
elevated temperature on bolt performance by (1) monitoring load changes during the test, (2) 
evaluations of the bolt/grout/rock interface following heating and cooling, and (3) pull-testing 
selected bolts to failure after heating and subsequent cooling. Each rock bolt included one 
vibrating wire load cell (load washer) that was installed between cover plates and adjustable 
angled washers. This entire assembly was bolted to the Williams bolt on the cold side of the 
insulation. 
Four of the rock bolts were installed on the heated side of the Thermal-Mechanical Alcove below 
the level of the heater. Another four rock bolts were installed on the opposite cold side of the 
Thermal-mechanical Alcove. The rock bolts and load cells were installed during July 1996. 
Initial readings were taken using a hand-held Geokon readout box, prior to connection to the 
DCS. The load cells each contain three strain gages, and the total load acting on the cell is 
calculated by averaging the measurements from all three. Post-cooling evaluation of bolt/grout 
interface was limited to the rock-bolt pull test because overcoring across these interfaces was 
unsuccessful. 
The locations of the rock bolts instrumented with rock-bolt load cells (RBLCs) are shown in 
Figures 6.2.3.1-1 and 6.2.3.1-2. Four RBLCs were installed on the heated side of the west face of 
the SHT block (RB-1, RB-2, RB-3, and RB-4), and four were installed on the opposite ambient 
side of the Thermal-Mechanical Alcove (RB-5, RB-6, RB-7, and RB-8). 
Detailed discussion of the SHT rock-bolt load testing is presented in Section 9.3 of the Single 
Heater Test Final Report (CRWMS M&O 1999 (129261]). SHT rock bolt data load data may be 
found in Input-DTN SNF35110695001.008 [113812]. 
6.2.3.3.1 Results: Rock-Bolt Load 
The data are presented as load (lb) versus time from the start of heating, in tabular form in 
Table 6.2.3.3-1. The data show a general decline in load measured in all the RBLCs through the 
end of heating. Three of the four heated rock bolts (RB-2, RB-3, and RB-4) show an increase in 
load after the heater is turned off, and RB-1 exhibits a stabilization of the previously observed 
load decrease. The increase is to only up to 100 lb, or 0.7% of the load measured in the bolt. The 
load increase is likely caused by thermal-contraction effects in the bolt itself, which likely has a

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.2-24 September 2002 
higher thermal expansion/contraction coefficient than the rock mass surrounding it. The ambient 
rock bolts continue to experience a decrease in load throughout the reporting period. 
Loads were measured in rock bolts installed on both the heated side of the SHT block and on the 
opposite ambient rib of the Thermal-Mechanical Alcove. The rock bolts were installed to 
evaluate the longer-term effects of elevated temperature on this type of rock anchorage. Results 
show that loads are decreasing in all load cells; however, the decrease is greatest in those rock 
bolts on the heated side of the SHT. Alternatively, there could also be some load loss caused by 
creep of the anchorage, which is composed of the steel bolt and mechanical anchor, the 
surrounding grout, and the rock itself. The fact that load decreases were about 1 2% for all rock 
bolts, except RB-1 and RB-2, which decreased about 7% and 4% respectively, appears to 
indicate: (a) the influence of anchorage creep on all the bolts and (b) the effect of temperature on 
the creep of the rock bolts, because rock bolts with the highest temperatures had the most load 
decrease. 
6.2.3.3.2 Measurement Uncertainty: Rock-Bolt Load 
Measurement uncertainties in SHT rock-bolt measurements are similar to many of those 
discussed in Section 6.2.3.1.2. Additional uncertainties include those associated with accuracy 
and precision as tabulated in Table 6.2.3.1-3. 
6.2.3.4 Laboratory ParametersThermal Expansion, Youngs Modulus, Poissons 
Ratio, and Peak Stress 
The SHT includes pre-heating planning, test design, pre-heating analyses, pre-heating 
characterization, test implementation, heating-phase testing, cooling-phase testing, and postcooling 
characterization and instrumentation/equipment evaluations. This section discusses the 
post-cooling characterization activities for mechanical processes after the cooling phase of the 
SHT was completed. Specifically, the activity described here is the use of post-cooling borehole 
and intact rock sample locations for laboratory determination of thermal-mechanical properties. 
A detailed discussion for all SHT laboratory mechanical parameters is presented in Section 6.2 
of the Single Heater Test Final Report (CRWMS M&O 1999 (129261]) and Section 4 of the 
Characterization of the ESF Thermal Test Area (CRWMS M&O 1996 [101428]). SHT 
preheating and post-cooling laboratory parameter data may be found in the Input-DTNs: 
SNL22080196001.002 [158306] and SNL22080196001.003 [119042]. 
6.2.3.4.1 Results: Laboratory ParametersThermal Expansion, Youngs Modulus, 
Poissons Ratio, Peak Stress and Axial Strain at Peak Stress 
The mean coefficients of thermal expansion (MCTEs) are summarized in Tables 6.2.3.4-1 and 
6.2.3.4-2 for heating and cooling, respectively, during the first thermal cycle. Data are categorized 
as being either from within or outside the maximum extent of the 100.C isotherm, and either 
perpendicular or parallel to the heater. The mean MCTEs and standard deviations about each mean 
are given at each temperature for each category. Summary data for the entire test suite are given 
with standard deviations and 95% confidence limits at the bottom of each table. All specimens 
show steep increases in MCTE beginning at approximately 150200.C and continuing until 
approximately 300.C. The steepest increases are between 250 and 300.C. This steep increase is

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.2-25 September 2002 
attributed to phase changes in the silica mineral phases. The MCTEs calculated over the 
temperature interval of 300325.C decrease as the phase change is completed. The specimens 
with lower MCTEs are primarily from within the approximate maximum extent of the 100.C 
isotherm. The SHT pre-heating characterization data and data from within the approximate 
maximum extent of the 100.C isotherm continue to track one another and fall below the 
remaining data sets. 
Fourteen specimens were tested in unconfined compression and the experimental data are 
summarized in Table 6.2.3.4-3. Mean values, standard deviations, and 95% confidence limits are 
given for Youngs modulus, Poissons ratio, peak stress, and axial strain at peak stress. Youngs 
moduli ranged from 20.1 GPa to 37.0 Gpa, with a mean value of 31.6 GPa. The standard 
deviation was 4.8 Gpa, and the 95% confidence limit was 2.5 GPa. Poissons ratio ranged 
from 0.12 to 0.39 with a mean value of 0.20. The standard deviation was 0.07, and the 95% 
confidence limit was 0.03. Peak stress ranged from 34 MPa to 246 Mpa, with a mean value of 
134 MPa. The standard deviation was 70 Mpa, and the 95% confidence limit was 37 MPa. 
Axial strain at peak stress ranged from 0.11% to 0.89%, with a mean value of 0.47%. The 
standard deviation was 0.25%, and the 95% confidence limit was 0.13%. 
6.2.3.4.2 Measurement Uncertainty: Laboratory ParametersThermal Expansion, 
Youngs Modulus, Poissons Ratio, and Peak Stress 
The uncertainty in the uniaxial compressive testing of intact rock samples, which results in the 
measurement of Youngs modulus, Poissons ratio, and peak stress, includes the accuracy of the 
load cell, the accuracy of the LVDT, specimen alignment, square and parallel of the specimen 
ends, changes in the specimen cross section area during the test, specimen variation, and 
anisotropy of the rock. Among these factors, the greatest uncertainty is with the specimen 
variation. The heterogeneity in the rock mass will have significant effects on its compressive 
strength and moduli. Many of these uncertainties also apply to thermal expansion of intact 
samples. In addition, temperature control contributes to uncertainties in thermal expansion. 
Additional discussion of the uncertainties associated with these measurements can be found in 
Section 9 and 11.2 of the Single Heater Test Final Report (CRWMS M&O 1999 (129261]). 
6.2.3.5 Field ParametersRock Mass Thermal Expansion 
Rock-mass thermal expansion is calculated from the in situ heating cycle data, including 
temperature change for a given axial length from ambient, gage length, and measured thermal 
displacement over the gage length. The rock-mass thermal-expansion coefficient was calculated 
for the SHT using selected data from MPBX-1, MPBX-3, and MPBX-2. Only the data from 
these MPBXs with relatively uniform temperature were used. Discussion of the SHT rock mass 
classification is presented in Section 8 of the ESF Thermal Test Area (CRWMS M&O 1996 
[101428]). 
SHT displacement data may be found in Input-DTNs SNF35110695001.009 [113819] and 
LL980109904243.015 [158299].

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.2-26 September 2002 
6.2.3.5.1 Results: Rock Mass Thermal Expansion 
The data presented in Table 6.2.3.5-1 are averaged values for each MPBX over the gage lengths 
shown. For MPBX-1, the mean value was 5.88 ..10-6/C; for MPBX-3, the mean value was 
4.14 ..10-6/C; and for MPBX-2, the mean value was 2.36 ..10-6/C. The calculated values for 
rock mass thermal expansion are consistently lower than laboratory intact values, regardless of 
temperature and gage length. This is to be expected because of fractures that are present in the 
SHT test block. Also, the values presented in Table 6.2.3.5-1 are for the single orientation 
parallel to the heater (N72W). It is possible that there could be some significant anisotropy in 
the rock mass thermal expansion coefficient because of differences in fracturing along different 
orientations. 
6.2.3.5.2 Measurement Uncertainty: Rock Mass Thermal Expansion 
Measurement uncertainty of the rock mass thermal expansion is dependent on the uncertainties 
of the original field measurements (MPBX displacements and temperatures), and in the 
discretization error associated with the available lengths over which to measure these values 
(primarily deviation from a constant temperature). Obviously the randomness of fracture spacing 
and size results in uncertainty that can be mitigated with numerous measurement locations along 
similar fractures patterns. 
6.2.4 SHT Chemical Measurements 
This section presents the results from geochemical studies of water samples collected during the 
SHT and mineralogical studies of pre-heating borehole cores and post-cooling overcores from 
the test block. The study of the geochemical composition of the water collected during the test 
provides insight into thermally driven geochemical processes. The mineralogical studies present 
information on the rock, providing a necessary starting point for the study of rock and water 
evolution with temperature and time. The aqueous geochemistry is discussed in Section 6.2.4.1. 
Mineralogical and petrologic studies are covered in Section 6.2.4.2. 
A detailed description of SHT chemical measurements is documented in Sections 6.4 and 10 of 
the Single Heater Test Final Report (CRWMS M&O 1999 [129261]). Input-DTNs and Output- 
DTNs for SHT chemical measurements are listed in Tables 4-2 and 6.2-1, respectively. 
6.2.4.1 Aqueous Chemistry 
Samples of water were collected from borehole 16-4 (see Figure 6.2-2) on four occasions during 
the course of the SHT and were distributed for analysis. Water collected in the field was tested 
for pH, filtered to 0.45 .m, and splits for analyses were prepared for distribution. Each field 
sample was also given a unique identification number, which was tracked by the Sample 
Management Facility (SMF). Samples were designated for analysis of metals, anions, and, stable 
isotopes. The metals samples were stabilized by acidifying the water with HNO3 and stored in 
polyethylene bottles. The anion samples were also stored in polyethylene, and the stable isotope 
samples were stored in glass. All bottles were filled to minimize headspace and tightly capped to 
reduce evaporation. The samples were maintained under refrigeration at the SMF until they were 
shipped.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.2-27 September 2002 
Of the four sampling activities, the first one on November 25, 1996, was an unexpected 
opportunity. Consequently, the sample was collected without obtaining a pH measurement in the 
field, and neither the filtration nor the acidification procedure was performed; as a result, data in 
DTN: LL970409604244.030 [111481] are designated non-Q. 
The cation analyses were performed at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) by 
Inductively Coupled Plasma and Atomic Emission Spectroscopy (ICP/AES). Total dissolved 
metals of Al, B, Ca, Fe, Mg, Li, Na, K, S, Si, and Sr were measured. Anions were measured by 
Ion Chromatography (IC); anions measured included F, Cl, Br, NO2
, NO3 
, PO4
3, and SO4
2. 
Bicarbonate (HCO3
.) was computed by charge balance, using the measured pH to indicate actual 
hydrogen activity at the time of sampling. The analytical aqueous chemistry results are in the 
TDMS under DTNs LL970101004244.027 [158309], LL970409604244.030 [111481] (12/96 to 
03/97), LL970703904244.034 [111482] (3/8/97 to 7/18/97) and LL971006604244.046 [148611]. 
In addition, as part of a scoping investigation, stable isotopes of oxygen and hydrogen, uranium, 
and strontium were analyzed by investigators at LLNL, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory 
(LBNL), and the U. S. Geological Survey (USGS) at Denver, Colorado. 
6.2.4.1.1 Field Sampling 
Among the boreholes instrumented with various monitoring systems shown in Figure 6.2-2, 
boreholes 20 (ESF-TMA-CHE-1) and 21 (ESF-TMA-CHE-2) were designed to collect aqueous 
chemical data from specific locations in the thermal test block. One borehole was instrumented 
with a suite of solid-state chemical sensors for in situ, real-time geochemical assessment of the 
contacting waters. Early in the SHT, however, the sensors performance was inconsistent with 
the manufacturers specifications. Subsequent laboratory testing demonstrated significant 
compositional dependencies; consequently, they were determined unsuitable for monitoring the 
water chemistry. The second borehole was fitted with absorbent pads that could be collected in 
the field and returned to the lab for analytical testing. Several pads were removed, examined, and 
found to be relatively dry. Nevertheless, an extraction process was developed in which pads were 
soaked in de-ionized water (dilution). The process was followed by sampling and filtering the 
solution. A clean-pad blank was also run to provide baseline corrections (per gram weight of 
fabric). The resulting solution chemistries were determined to be very dilute, with a high 
uncertainty arising from scatter in the background contributions as well as imprecise weight 
corrections. 
Fortuitously, borehole 16 (ESF-TMA-NEU-2), which was drilled and instrumented for 
hydrology studies (See Sections 6.2.2.3 and 6.2.2.4) proved to be important to collecting SHT 
water for analysis. The borehole was instrumented with a string of high-temperature, inflatable 
packers, which isolated four open zones. The inflated packers, which straddled fractured regions, 
also provided a means of containing mobilized water entering an open zone. One zone in 
particularzone 4 of borehole 16 (at a depth of 3 m)yielded a significant and steady supply of 
water for chemical analyses starting in November 1996 and continuing throughout the heating 
phase of the SHT.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.2-28 September 2002 
6.2.4.1.2 Results: Aqueous Chemistry 
The results of chemical analyses for the four suites of SHT water are presented in Table 6.2.4.1-1 
For comparative purposes, data from several relevant water sources (other than the SHT) have 
been included, and their respective sources are cited among the footnotes. The reported 
temperatures are those downloaded from the Data Acquisition System at time of sampling. The 
pH measurement is a field value taken at the time of sample collection. The one exception is for 
the initial sample (collected November 25, 1996); the pH value reported was for a sample 
measured about 30 days after collection. 
Table 6.2.4.1-1 clearly shows that the SHT water is more dilute than other in situ waters from the 
general vicinity. Trends in the SHT water indicate Na and Si are the dominant metals, followed 
by Ca, with other cations and anions in considerably lower abundances. The same general 
patterns are observed in both saturated and unsaturated zone waters sampled from the region. 
Over time, the concentrations of Na, Ca, Mg, and Sr are seen to systematically decrease, whereas 
all other elements exhibit nonsystematic variation. SHT waters are slightly acidic with pH values 
between 6.2 and 6.9. These measured pH readings may have indicated elevated CO2 partial 
pressures in equilibrium with the water in the packed-off interval. 
Stable isotopic data (18O and deuterium) are plotted as .
18O relative to .D in Figure 6.2.4.1-1. 
The meteoric water line is plotted for reference. The scatter in the data for Suite 1 may reflect the 
fact that the first samples were collected during an unanticipated window of opportunity in a 
borehole not necessarily designed for chemical sampling. Consequently, standard collection 
procedures were not employed for these first waters sampled. Generally, data for Suites 24 were 
more tightly grouped and were broadly consistent with the other analyzed waters. There does not 
appear to be a clear distinction in the isotopic data among the various water sources represented 
here. 
6.2.4.1.3 Measurement Uncertainty: Aqueous Chemistry 
The borehole in which the four water samples were collected for chemical analysis was not 
designed for water sampling. In fact, the unanticipated first samples were collected prior to 
standard collection procedure being approved. This situation, however, was remedied so that the 
three subsequent water samples were collected, preserved, and stored appropriately. All the 
sample analyses were performed according to the existing quality procedures then in place. 
6.2.4.2 Mineralogic and Petrologic Analyses 
The SHT served as a prototype test for the larger DST. Here, techniques were developed to 
produce a quantitative inventory of natural minerals in the fracture network of the test block. 
Continuous characterization over meter-scale distances was essential to provide estimated 
mineral abundances of general validity as input to numerical geochemical models of thermal 
tests. Collection of data on this scale also would document the existence of variability in the 
mineral content of the fracture network. Data for natural-mineral abundances were obtained from 
cores drilled prior to heating. Data on stellerite abundance (fracture-surface coverage) in 
fractures have been submitted to the TDMS under the Input-DTN LA0009SL831151.001 
[153485].

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.2-29 September 2002 
The ability to identify and document test-related mineralogic reactions was a key to assessing the 
reliability of computational models of coupled thermal-hydrologic-chemical processes. Two 
types of post-cooling (following heating and cooling) sampling were employed: overcoring of 
pre-heating boreholes and drilling of new continuously cored boreholes. Both coring and 
overcoring were performed after the field test was completed. Identification of pre-heating and 
post-cooling minerals was verified by X-ray diffraction analysis (XRD), scanning-electron 
microscopy (SEM), and energy-dispersive X-ray analysis (EDX). A summary of pre-heating 
fracture minerals and post-cooling products can be found in the TDMS under the Input-DTN 
LA0009SL831151.001 [153485]. 
6.2.4.2.1 Results: Mineralogy of the Pre-Heating Natural Fracture System 
Time constraints precluded completion of an inventory for all fracture-coating minerals. Instead, 
a survey of stellerite abundance in macroscopically visible fractures was undertaken for preheating 
drill core MPBX-1 (borehole 2 as shown in Figure 6.2-2). Stellerite, a zeolite, was 
chosen because it can be identified with a high level of confidence based on stereomicroscopic 
examination. Visual-recognition criteria of crystal morphology, luster, and hardness were 
verified by XRD of typical deposits. Because stellerite is a major fracture-coating mineral in the 
SHT block, quantification of its abundance was especially useful input for geochemical 
modeling. 
The survey was conducted piece-by-piece for the MPBX-1 core. For each fracture, the percent of 
fracture surface covered by stellerite was estimated by comparison with standard abundance 
diagrams like those of Compton (1962 [101588], pp. 332-333). The observed or calculated 
coverage of a fracture by stellerite is defined for this estimation as an attribute shared by the 
opposing surfaces of an intact fracture. For partly sealed fractures, the estimated percent stellerite 
coverage of nonsealed fracture area was treated as an attribute of the entire fracture. Matching 
fracture faces at the ends of adjacent core pieces count as a single fracture, with percent zeolite 
coverage equal to the higher of the values estimated for each face. The results of this inventory 
are presented in Table 6.2.4.2-1. 
Additional natural-fracture minerals, as identified by XRD in two samples from drill core ESFTMA-
H-1 (borehole 1 as shown in Figure 6.2-2), include smectite, feldspar, and quartz (Tables 
6.2.4.2-2 and 6.2.4.2-3). 
6.2.4.2.2 Results: Evidence of Mineral Deposition 
Alteration products of the SHT resulting from fluid/rock interaction have been identified in the 
overcores of borehole 16 (ESF-TMA-PTC-NEU-2) and borehole 2 (ESF-TMA-PTC-MPBX-1). 
The new mineral deposits are of three general varieties, described here from the occurrences in 
the ESF-TMA-PTC-NEU-2 borehole. This borehole was inclined upward from the surface of the 
test block, so that the bottom of the borehole was above the heater. Water that entered the 
borehole from fractures near the bottom flowed downslope along the wellbore. Small white 
mounds and patches, 	1 mm across, of gypsum . calcite . opal-A are present on natural fracture 
surfaces and pre-heating borehole 16 surfaces near the bottom of the ESF-TMA-PTC-NEU-2 
overcore. Some of the mounds are concentrated along the traces of very tight fractures 
intersecting the borehole or fracture surfaces on which the mounds were deposited. Glassy scale

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.2-30 September 2002 
deposits, mostly silica, are especially abundant on the bottom of the pre-heating borehole 2. 
Some scale deposits take the form of dried drip marks on the sides of the borehole. 
Gypsum 
The identification of gypsum is based on XRD of white deposits from pre-heating borehole 
surface and adjoining fractures in the 15.516.5 ft (4.725.03 m) interval of ESF-TMA-PTCNEU-
2. Only one core fragment contained enough material to collect about a milligram for XRD 
analysis. Smaller deposits on other core pieces are identified as gypsum on the basis of similar 
crystal morphology observed in SEM images and the Ca+S peaks in the energy-dispersive X-ray 
spectrum. 
Opal-A and Other Silica 
Opal-A in the white deposits from PTC-NEU-2 (pre-heating overcore borehole 16) was 
identified by a combination of XRD and SEM-EDX. A broad peak, characteristic of structurally 
amorphous material, was observed in the XRD pattern from the white deposits. SEM-EDX 
examination of the deposits revealed the presence of nearly pure silica (Si peak on the EDX 
spectrum) in portions of the deposits with no discernible crystal form. 
Some opal-rich areas of the white mounds contain masses of minute silica tubules projecting up 
to about 5 .m from the surface of the deposit. A few tubules are straight, but most have variably 
tortuous shapes. Outside diameters of the tubules range from about 0.3 to 0.7 .m, whereas inside 
diameters vary from less than 0.1 to about 0.3 .m. 
Deposits of glassy silica scale 	0.2 mm thick were observed on the pre-heating wellbore surface 
of ESF-TMA-PTC-MPBX-1, a horizontal borehole close to the heater borehole. There is a 23 
cm wide zone of silica deposition along what is inferred to be the bottom of the wellbore surface. 
In addition, silica scale deposits define elongate drip marks on the inferred lower half of the 
wellbore surface. The silica scale generally consists of two texturally distinct components. At the 
base of the deposits are aggregates of platy silica particles about 1 to 5 .m across, silica rods 1 to 
2 .m across and up to about 15 .m long, and a few round particles 1 to 2 .m across. Overlying 
the silica particles are cracked silica sheets about 2 .m thick. The siliceous composition of the 
scale was documented by EDX). 
Sampling the silica scale for mineralogic analysis was complicated by the small quantities of 
material and the difficulty in removing the scale from the wellbore surface while minimizing the 
incorporation of bedrock. Some of the thickest scale deposits were laid down on top of 0.1 mm 
thick fine particulate layers, to which the scale adheres. The milligram sample collected for XRD 
was estimated by visual examination to contain about 20% silica scale. Because of the high 
impurity content, identification of the scale mineralogy on the basis of XRD is very uncertain. Of 
the silica phases identified in the samplecristobalite, quartz, tridymite, and opal-Athe opal-A 
(queried in Section 6.2.4.2-3 because its presence is uncertain) is most likely to be solely a test 
product. The ESF-TMA-MPBX-1 borehole (borehole 2), where this material was deposited, was 
heated to more than 150.C during the test. In comparison, the maximum temperature was 
slightly less than 80.C (SNF35110695001.008 [113812]) in borehole 16 where opal-A without 
platy morphology was deposited. Further mineralogic study might establish whether structural

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.2-31 September 2002 
differences exist between the silicas from the two boreholes and whether those differences might 
be related to the different thermal histories. 
Calcite 
Calcite has been documented by XRD as a constituent of the white mounds deposited on natural 
fracture surfaces and on the pre-heating borehole surface of overcore ESF-TMA-PTC-NEU-2 
(borehole 16) in the 15.517.0 ft (4.725.18 m) interval. The mineral is also part of the thin, 
nearly invisible coatings present on the pre-heating wellbore surface in the same interval. A thin, 
brown particulate deposit on the bottom of the wellbore also contains calcite. In overcore ESFTMA-
PTC-MPBX-1, calcite occurs with silica scale, fine particulate deposits, or other deposits 
on the pre-heating wellbore. Discrete calcite crystals have not been documented by SEM-EDX 
studies of these deposits, due perhaps to spectroscopic interference from other calcium-rich 
phases such as gypsum and stellerite, or to overgrowths of other minerals. 
6.2.4.2.3 Measurement Uncertainty: Mineralogic and Petrologic Analyses 
A formal error analysis was not performed for the exploratory research technique employed to 
obtain the stellerite abundance in fractures presented in Table 6.2.4.2-1. The principal sources of 
error lie in estimating the percent zeolite coverage of a fracture and in estimating the portion of a 
fracture sealed by vapor-phase minerals. The loss of small amounts of core on account of 
nonrecovery or sample removal is an additional source of uncertainty not related to errors of 
measurement. 
6.2.5 SHT Miscellaneous Measurements and Observations 
This section discusses additional SHT measurements not covered in the prior four SHT sections. 
Specifically, fracture mapping, infrared imaging, and borehole video logging are discussed. 
Detailed discussion on these measurements is documented in the report entitled Characterization 
of the ESF Thermal Test Area (CRWMS M&O 1996 [101428]). Input-DTNs and Output-DTNs 
of applicable SHT miscellaneous measurements are listed in Tables 4-2 and 6.2-1, respectively. 
6.2.5.1 Fracture Mapping 
The objective of geologic mapping in the SHT area was to determine the vertical and horizontal 
variability of fracture networks, to characterize any faults and fault zones, to map the 
lithostratigraphic features of geologic subunits and the abundance and character of lithophysal 
zones, and to assist in selection of test locations. Two data collection techniques were used: fullperiphery 
mapping and detailed line surveys. 
Mapping in the Thermal Test Alcove was carried out by United States Geological Survey 
(USGS) and United States Bureau of Reclamation (USBR). It was done essentially to the same 
standards used in the ESF Main Drift, using Technical Procedure NWM-USGS-G-32, R0. From 
these procedures, the USGS/USBR used full-periphery mapping techniques and detailed line 
surveys to characterize the rock and fractures in the alcove. 
Geologic mapping included recording lithostratigraphic and structural features on 1:125 scale 
drawings. Maps were developed in the full-periphery style, in which the tunnel walls were

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.2-32 September 2002 
unrolled to produce a flat map of the tunnel periphery. Discontinuities and lithostratigraphic 
contacts with trace lengths longer than 1 m were recorded on the field sheets. The orientation of 
geologic features was determined using a goniometer for strike azimuth and a Brunton compass 
for dip values. Discontinuity orientations were recorded using the right-hand rule, where dip 
direction is 90 degrees to the right (clockwise) of strike. Traces of lithostratigraphic and 
structural features were sketched onto the geologic drawings and later digitized with AutoCAD. 
Detailed line surveys (DLS) were generally conducted along the right wall, one and a half meters 
above the floor of the drift. In the Thermomechanical Alcove and Thermomechanical Alcove 
Extension, the detailed line surveys were conducted along the left wall, which borders the SHT 
block and therefore the area of greatest interest. A metric measuring tape was affixed to the wall 
and discontinuities with trace lengths longer than 30 cm were reported on the survey. 
Discontinuities that intersect the wall within 30 cm above and below the tape were also 
considered. Strike azimuth, dip, discontinuity type, trace length, number of visible fracture 
terminations and types of terminations, aperture, roughness, infilling type, and thickness were 
recorded in the DLS notebook in tabular form. These data were then transferred to an Access 
database. 
Detailed discussion, including full periphery geotechnical map for Alcove 5, is presented in 
Section 7 of the report entitled Characterization of the ESF Thermal Test Area (CRWMS M&O 
1996 [101428]). 
6.2.5.1.1 Results: Fracture Mapping 
Thermal Test Alcove 5 was excavated at Station 28+27, near the base of the ESF North Ramp 
and at the beginning of the Main Drift. It was excavated in an easterly direction off the northsouth 
trending Main Drift and at a downward angle of approximately 10 to 15 degrees. 
The lithology of the unit consists of densely welded, devitrified tuff of rhyolitic composition, 
containing vapor-phase minerals and about 1% phenochrysts, chiefly feldspar and biotite. 
Lithophysae are rare (less than 1%), and range in size up to 80 mm, with vapor-phase minerals 
and very light gray (N8) rims and spots. Short (1020 cm), discontinuous, subhorizontal vapor 
phase partings are present throughout the unit, while the more developed subhorizontal partings 
form bedding plane features on the order of meters apart. 
Fractures in this unit are generally moderately to widely spaced (30 cm to 2 m), slightly to 
moderately continuous (1 m to 10 m), and slightly open to tight. A series of low-angle shears 
strike through the area of the alcove in an east-west direction and dip to the north. These shears 
form local subhorizontal breccia zones or wedges where they intercept the more predominant 
vapor phase partings and bedding planes. 
Results of detailed line surveys indicated three prominent joint sets in the Thermal Test Facility. 
These joints sets correspond to similar sets observed in the Tptpmn in the Main Drift. Joint Set 1 
(JS1) and Joint Set 2 (JS2) are both near vertical, relatively long (34 m in length), had relatively 
smooth surfaces (Brown 1981 [102003], pp. JRC 4JRC 6), and relatively small variations in 
amplitudes normal to the joint surfaces (0.050.2 m). Joint apertures are typically 1 mm to 2 mm, 
open, and with little or no infilling. Joint Set 1 has a dip direction of approximately 40 and a dip

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.2-33 September 2002 
angle of 70 to 85. Joint Set 2 has a dip direction of approximately 130 and a dip angle of 70 
to 90. Joint Set 1 and 2 are difficult to observe because their orientation was subparallel to the 
walls. 
Joint Set 3 (JS3) is a relatively low-angle vapor-phase parting surface, with a dip direction of 
approximately 300 and a dip angle of 15 to 40. Compared to Joint Set 1 and Joint Set 2, the 
parting surfaces of Joint Set 3 are generally shorter (1.0 m1.3 m), have more irregular surfaces 
(Brown 1981 [102003], pp. JRC 10JRC 16), and have larger variations in amplitudes normal to 
the joint surfaces (0.2 m0.3 m). The apertures for Joint Set 3 are generally wider (3 m5 m) and 
are filled with vapor-phase calcite and quartz and occasionally Fe-Mn oxides. The joint density 
is approximately seven fractures per cubic meter. 
6.2.5.1.2 Measurement Uncertainty: Fracture Mapping 
Uncertainty associated with SHT fracture mapping is similar to that discussed in Section 
6.1.4.1.2. 
6.2.5.2 Infrared Imaging 
The objective of infrared imaging (IR) of rock surfaces prior to the onset of heating was to 
establish the initial conditions on the drift walls around the SHT region, specifically the 
temperature distributions at the outlets of potential pathways for fluids. During the heating 
period, thermally induced flow can change the temperature at and near the exits, and the hot 
spots can be detected. 
Before the heating stage, the rock surface temperature depends on the heterogeneous pneumatic 
and hydrological characteristics in the fractured rock, the evaporative processes on the surfaces, 
and the drift conditions. Air with relative humidity substantially below 100%, maintained by the 
ventilation, can dry up the surfaces. The use of construction water during excavation and drilling, 
and in wall washing to suppress dust, can wet the surfaces. These construction and operation 
activities generally have larger impacts on the rock surface temperature than the intrinsic 
heterogeneous flow and heat transfer processes in the rock. 
A set of reconnaissance surveys was conducted on April 11-12, 1996, after excavation of the 
drifts around the SHT region. For this set of reconnaissance IR surveys, a hand-held 1 m . 1 m 
aluminum frame was used against the wall above and below the spring line for reference and for 
aiding the focusing of the IR camera. The human body, with temperature hotter than the rock, 
introduced distortions to the IR images. The triangular-shaped aluminum foil marker at the lower 
left corner of the frame accentuates the high reflectivity, or low emissivity, of aluminum as an 
effective IR mirror. A ladder and nine spray paint cans identified in the muck pile also reflect the 
IR temperatures of the surroundings, including the air. 
Similar images were taken on other walls surrounding the SHT region and on the ceilings. 
Additional surveys were also carried out in June 1996, with essentially uniform temperatures on 
the walls observed. These images were digitized and later compared with the images taken at the 
same location during and following the SHT heating phase. For the end wall of the alcove

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.2-34 September 2002 
extension, an aluminum grid was installed on the wall so that human body heat would not distort 
the IR images in later surveys. 
Detailed discussion of SHT infrared imaging is presented in Section 9.2 of the Characterization 
of the ESF Thermal Test Area (CRWMS M&O 1996 [101428]) and Section 8.4 of the Single 
Heater Test Final Report (CRWMS M&O 1999 [129261]). SHT infrared images and 
accompanying data may be found in the following Input-DTNs: LB970100123142.002 [158288], 
LB970400123142.001 [158289], LB970700123142.002 [158295], LB971000123142.002 
[158296], LB980120123142.001 [158297]. 
6.2.5.2.1 Results: Infrared Imaging 
Wet (cool) surfaces appear in IR images near the invert where some remaining muck is piled 
against the wall. In the corresponding IR images, the muck pile is colder than the wall surface 
above. On the wall, there are slightly cooler areas corresponding to the apparently wet areas. 
Hot spots show up in the IR images of the SHT wall above and below the mid-height between 
the invert and the drift crown. 
The hot spots in the rock could be associated with pathways through the rock masses behind 
the wall. The pneumatic pathways are likely along heterogeneous channels through the fracture 
network and exit at spots. 
6.2.5.2.2 Measurement Uncertainty: Infrared Imaging 
Uncertainty in the infrared measurements include parallax changes to the images, subjective 
interpretation of temperature differences along the surface of the image, and natural variations 
along a surface. 
6.2.5.3 Borehole Video Logging 
The objective of borehole video logs was to provide descriptive visual information from 
boreholes in the DST block and to supplement other available characterization data. Borehole 
video logs were also used to help select appropriate depths for packer settings for 
air-permeability testing. 
The borehole television camera consists of the downhole video camera system, monitor, and 
VCR. The TV/VCR was first configured to record, and then the camera was inserted into the 
borehole. The camera was paused as needed. The video tape was viewed to ensure visibility and 
adequacy. The process was repeated if the video information was inadequate. Any unusable 
entries or videos were identified as inadequate. The following information was recorded in the 
scientific notebook: borehole identifier, date, measuring and test equipment serial numbers if 
applicable, the location of the zero datum point, traceability between the notebook and the video, 
depth-correction measurements if applicable, and the total depth reached.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.2-35 September 2002 
6.2.5.3.1 Results: Borehole Video Logging 
Borehole video logs provide much visual information regarding fractures, including aperature 
size, fracture frequency, and fracture orientation. Video logs, which are documented by Mitchell 
(1996 [159518]), include visual descriptions of the boreholes in the SHT region. 
6.2.5.3.2 Measurement Uncertainty: Borehole Video Logging 
These observations are inherently subjective, and determination of orientation and location may 
be subjected to multiple interpretations.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.2-36 September 2002 
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.2-1 September 2002 
Figure 6.2-1. Schematic Plan View of ESF Thermal Test Facility Including the SHT

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.2-2 September 2002 
Figure 6.2-2. Schematic SHT Layout of the Instrumentation Boreholes

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.2-3 September 2002 
0 
500 
1000 
1500 
2000 
2500 
3000 
3500 
4000 
4500 
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 
Time (Days) 
Cooling Phase 
Power Outage 
Heating Phase 
Figure 6.2.1.1-1. SHT Power History

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.2-4 September 2002 
0 
10 
20 
30 
40 
50 
60 
70 
80 
90 
100 
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 
Time (Days) 
Temperature (oC) 
RTD-15-1 
RTD-15-5 
RTD-15-10 
RTD-15-15 
RTD-15-21 
RTD-15-25 
RTD-15-27 
Figure 6.2.1.2-1. Temperature History for SHT Borehole 15 at Select Locations

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.2-5 September 2002 
0 
10 
20 
30 
40 
50 
60 
70 
80 
90 
100
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 
Distance (m) 
Temperature (oC) 
28 Days 
56 Days 
98 Days 
196 Days 
275 Days 
294 Days 
350 Days 
406 Days 
462 Days 
Figure 6.2.1.2-2. Temperature Profile for SHT Borehole 15 at Select Times

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.2-6 September 2002 
0 
50 
100 
150 
200 
250 
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 
Time (Days) 
Temperature (oC) 
TC-1A-1 
TC-1A-2 
TC-1A-3 
TC-1A-4 
TC-1A-5 
TC-1A-6 
TC-1A-7 
TC-1A-8 
TC-1A-9 
TC-1A-10 
Figure 6.2.1.2-3. Temperature History for SHT Borehole 1 at Select Locations

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.2-7 September 2002 
0 
50 
100 
150 
200 
250
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 
Y (m) 
Temperature (oC) 
28 Days 
56 Days 
98 Days 
196 Days 
275 Days 
294 Days 
350 Days 
406 Days 
462 Days 
Figure 6.2.1.2-4. Temperature Profile for SHT Borehole 1 at Select Times

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.2-8 September 2002 
Figure 6.2.2.1-1. Interpretation of ERT Moisture Data during the SHT Heating Phase

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.2-9 September 2002 
Figure 6.2.2.1-2. Interpretation of ERT Moisture Data during the SHT Cooling Phase

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.2-10 September 2002 
TIME (NS) 
100 100 
50 
Travel time 
pick 
50 
NOTE: Shown are gathers for receivers at 2.37and 2.61 meters down borehole 15. 
Figure 6.2.2.2-1. Two Typical SHT GPR Receiver Gathers for the 15-17 Borehole Pair on January 16, 
1997

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.2-11 September 2002 
NOTE: a) Survey taken January 15, 1997, b) survey taken March 12, 1997, 
c) survey taken May 29, 1997, and d) survey taken January 7, 1998. 
Figure 6.2.2.2-2. SHT GPR Velocity Tomograms for Borehole Pair 15-17

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.2-12 September 2002 
NOTE: Each tomogram is a difference from the baseline tomogram after 
a) 5 months, b) 7 months, c) 9 months, and d) 17 months. 
Figure 6.2.2.2-3. SHT GPR Velocity Difference Tomograms for Borehole Pair 15-17

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.2-13 September 2002 
Figure 6.2.2.3-1. Smoothed Difference Fraction Volume Water Content Measured in SHT Borehole 15 
using Neutron Logging (April 30 and May 21, 1997) 
Figure 6.2.2.3-2. Smoothed Difference Fraction Volume Water Content Measured in SHT Borehole 15 
using Neutron Logging (November 24 and December 17, 1997) 
Difference Fraction Volume Water Content Difference Fraction Volume Water Content

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.2-14 September 2002 
0.0 
0.5 
1.0 
1.5 
2.0 
2.5 
5/15/96 8/23/96 12/1/96 3/11/97 6/19/97 9/27/97 1/5/98 
k/kpre-heating (m2) 
Inj Behind 16-4 
Inj Behind 18-4 
Inj Between 16-2, 16-4 
Inj Between 16-1, 16-3 
Inj Between 18-1, 18-3 
Heating Terminated: May 28, 1997 
Figure 6.2.2.4-1. SHT Permeability Changes for Borehole 16 and 18 as a Ratio of Transient 
Permeabilities to the Baseline Permeability Estimate 
Temperature Profiles for Boreholes 16 & 18 
20 
25 
30 
35 
40 
45 
50 
55 
08/01/1996 10/02/1996 12/03/1996 02/03/1997 04/06/1997 06/07/1997 08/08/1997 10/09/1997 12/10/1997 
Temperature (oC) 
TMA-TEMP-18-4 
TMA-TEMP-18-3 
TMA-TEMP-18-2 
TMA-TEMP-18-1 
TMA-TEMP-16-3 
TMA-TEMP-16-2 
TMA-TEMP-16-1 
Heating Terminated 
May 28, 1997 
Heating Initiated 
August 26, 1996 
Figure 6.2.2.4-2. Passive Monitoring Temperature Data in SHT Boreholes 16 and 18

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.2-15 September 2002 
SHT Relative Humidity Measurements 
84 
86 
88 
90 
92 
94 
96 
98 
100 
102 
08/01/1996 10/02/1996 12/03/1996 02/03/1997 04/06/1997 06/07/1997 08/08/1997 10/09/1997 12/10/1997 
Relative Humidity (%) 
TMA-HUM-18-4 
TMA-HUM-18-3 
TMA-HUM-18-2 
TMA-HUM-18-1 
TMA-HUM-16-4 
TMA-HUM-16-3 
TMA-HUM-16-2 
TMA-HUM-16-1 
Figure 6.2.2.4-3. Passive Monitoring Relative Humidity Data in SHT Boreholes 16 and 18 
SHT Boreholes #16 & #18 
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5 
08/01/1996 10/02/1996 12/03/1996 02/03/1997 04/06/1997 06/07/1997 08/08/1997 10/09/1997 12/10/1997 
Pressure (kPa gauge) 
TMA-PRES-18-4 
TMA-PRES-18-3 
TMA-PRES-18-2 
TMA-PRES-18-1 
TMA-PRES-16-4 
TMA-PRES-16-3 
TMA-PRES-16-2 
TMA-PRES-16-1 
Figure 6.2.2.4-4. Passive Monitoring Pressure Data in SHT Boreholes 16 and 18

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.2-16 September 2002 
0 
50 
100 
150 
200 
250 
300 
350 
400
0 20 40 60 80 100 
wet @ 25.1C dry @ 25.1C 
Matric Potential (- MPa ) 
Average Saturation (%) 
NOTE: Lines connect the points and do not represent curve fits. The point at 100% saturation is 
inferred. 
Figure 6.2.2.5-1. Average Moisture Retention Curves for 11 SHT Samples at 25.1C

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.2-17 September 2002 
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 
x (m) 
-4 
-3 
-2 
-1
0
1
2
3
4 
z (m) 
liquid saturation 
0.9400 
0.8314 
0.7229 
0.6143 
0.5057 
0.3971 
0.2886 
0.1800 
r = 3m 
199 
200 
201 
* Cores 81, 83, and 86 not available for 
hydrological measurements. 
** Derived saturation is depressed because 
of the high porosity values (13 % - 17 %). 
80** 
97** 
02** 
82 84 
85 
87 
88 
89 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
90 
91 
95 
96 
03 
01 
92 
93 
94 
98 
99 
00 
* * * 
Figure 6.2.2.5-2. Percent Liquid Saturation of Cores from Boreholes 199, 200, 201, Dry-drilled after the 
Cooling Phase of the SHT

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.2-18 September 2002 
Figure 6.2.3.1-1. Plan View Showing Locations of the SHT Mechanical Boreholes 
Figure 6.2.3.1-2. Cross-section Showing Locations of the SHT Mechanical Boreholes

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.2-19 September 2002 
Figure 6.2.3.1-3. Displacement History for SHT MPBX-3 Borehole

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.2-20 September 2002 
Figure 6.2.4.1-1. Stable Isotope Data for SHT Waters (Suite 14), Saturated-Zone Waters from Wells G- 
4 and J-13, UZ-14 Perched Water, and ESF Pore Water

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.2-1 September 2002 
Table 6.2-1. Output-DTNs along with Input-DTNs for the Single Heater Test 
Input-DTN [DIRS] Input-DTN 
Description 
Input-DTN 
Text Location Output-DTN Output-DTN 
Description 
SNF35110695001.001 [158315] 
and 
LL970805504244.043 [158313] 
XYZ Coordinates of 
Boreholes and Sensors 
6.2 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
SNF35110695001.008 [113812] Heater Power 6.2.1.1 MO0208RESTRSHT.002 Power and 
Temperature Data 
SNF35110695001.008 [113812] Temperature  Heating and 
Initial Six Months of Cooling 
6.2.1.2 
SNF35110695001.009 [113819] Temperature  Last Two 
Months of Cooling 
6.2.1.2 
SNL22080196001.001 [109722] Thermal Conductivity 6.2.1.3 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
LL970101004244.026 [158281] Electrical Resistance 
Tomography 
6.2.2.1 LL020801823142.029 ERT Tomograms 
LL970505404244.031 [148609] Electrical Resistance 
Tomography 
6.2.2.1 
LL971002904244.044 [158286] Electrical Resistance 
Tomography 
6.2.2.1 
LL980105204244.049 [148610] Electrical Resistance 
Tomography 
6.2.2.1 
LB980901123142.003 [119016] Ground Penetrating Radar 
Data 
6.2.2.2 LB0208GPRSHTCP.001 GPR Velocity 
Tomograms 
LL980106904244.051 [118963] Neutron Logging 6.2.2.3 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
LB960500834244.001 [105587] Pre-Heating Air Injection 6.2.2.4 LB0208AIRKSHTC.001 Permeability Data 
(Boreholes 16 and 18) 
LB980120123142.008 [158280] Air Injections in Boreholes 
16 and 18, Part 1 of 4 
6.2.2.4 
LB970500123142.001 [158293] Air Injections in Boreholes 
16 and 18, Part 2 of 4 
6.2.2.4 
LB0204SHAIRK3Q.001 [159543] Air Injections in Boreholes 
16 and 18, Part 3 of 4 
6.2.2.4 
LB971000123142.001 [118965] Air Injections in Boreholes 
16 and 18, Part 4 of 4 
6.2.2.4 
LB980901123142.001 [118999] Post-Cooling Air Injection 
and Gas Tracer Testing 
6.2.2.4 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
LB980901123142.002 [119009] Temperature, Relative 
Humidity, Gauge Pressure 
(Passive Monitoring) 
6.2.2.4 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
LB970500123142.003 [131500] Pre-Heating Laboratory 
Saturation, Porosity, Bulk 
Density Gravimetric Water 
Content 
6.2.2.5 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
LL970709004244.035 [127312] Pre-Heating Laboratory 
Porosity, Relative Humidity, 
and Water Saturation 
6.2.2.5 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.2-2 September 2002 
Table 6.2-1. Output-DTNs along with Input-DTNs for Single Heater Test (continued) 
Input-DTN [DIRS] Input-DTN 
Description 
Input-DTN 
Text Location Output-DTN Output-DTN 
Description 
LB980901123142.006 [119029] Post-Cooling Laboratory 
Saturation, Porosity, Bulk 
Density Gravimetric Water 
Content 
6.2.2.5 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
SNF35110695001.008 [113812] Standard MPBX 
Displacements  Heating 
and Initial Six Months of 
Cooling 
6.2.3.1 SN0208F3511695.011 Displacement Data 
SNF35110695001.009 [113819] Standard MPBX 
Displacements  Last Two 
Months of Cooling 
6.2.3.1 
LL980109904243.015 [158299] Optical MPBX 
Displacements 
6.2.3.1 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
SNF35110695001.010 [158300] Rock Mass Deformation 
Modulus  Borehole 
(Goodman) Jack 
6.2.3.2 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
SNF35110695001.008 [113812] Rock Bolt Load  Heating 
and Initial Six Months of 
Cooling 
6.2.3.3 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
SNF35110695001.009 [113819] Rock Bolt Load  Last Two 
Months of Cooling 
6.2.3.3 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
SNL22080196001.001 [109722] Laboratory Thermal 
Expansion 
6.2.3.4 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
SNL22080196001.002 [158306] Pre-Heating Laboratory 
Unconfined Compressive 
Strength, Dry Bulk Density, 
Poissons Ratio, Youngs 
Modulus, Saturated Bulk 
Density, Seismic Velocity 
6.2.3.4 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
SNL22080196001.003 [119042] Post-Cooling Laboratory 
Thermal Conductivity, 
Thermal Expansion, 
Unconfined Compressive 
Strength, Dry Bulk Density, 
Poisson's Ratio, Young's 
Modulus 
6.2.3.4 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
SNF35110695001.008 [113812] Rock Mass Thermal 
Expansion 
6.2.3.5 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
LL970101104244.027 [158309] Chemical Abundance Data 6.2.4.1 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
LL970409604244.030 [111481] Chemical Abundance Data 6.2.4.1 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
LL970703904244.034 [111482] Chemical Abundance Data 6.2.4.1 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
LL971006604244.046 [148611] Chemical Abundance Data 6.2.4.1 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
LA0009SL831151.001 [153485] Fracture Mineralogy 6.2.4.2 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
LB970100123142.002 [158288] Infrared Images, Part 1 of 5 6.2.5.2 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
LB970400123142.001 [158289] Infrared Images, Part 2 of 5 6.2.5.2 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
LB970700123142.002 [158295] Infrared Images, Part 3 of 5 6.2.5.2 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
LB971000123142.002 [158296] Infrared Images, Part 4 of 5 6.2.5.2 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
LB980120123142.001 [158297] Infrared Images, Part 5 of 5 6.2.5.2 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.2-3 September 2002 
Table 6.2-2. SHT Borehole Information 
Types and No. of Sensors 
Collar Coordinates 
(meters)1 
Bottom 
Coordinates 
(meters)1 
Orientation 
Degree 
Diameter 
(cm) 
Length 
(m) 
Volume 
(m3) 
Thermo- 
Couples 
RTD Thermistors Load Call 
(Average) 
Anchor 
in MPBX 
Type/Wire 
Extensometer 
Humidity 
Sensor 
Pressure 
Transducer 
Electrode 
Sensor 
(ERT) 
Chemistry 
Absorbing 
Pad 
Borehole 
Number 
Borehole 
Identification Primary Purpose 
X Y Z X Y Z Comments 
1 ESF-TMA-H-1 Heater 0.01 0.04 -0.03 0.00 6.97 -0.01 0.5 9.60 7.00 0.05 27 5 m Long Heater w/ 
Metallic Spring 
Centralizers 
2 ESF-TMA-MPBX-1 MPBX - Rock Mass 
Displacement 
0.18 0.08 0.27 0.14 6.99 0.28 0.5 7.57 7.00 0.03 9 1 6 Thermocouple 
Sensors between and 
at Anchors in MPBX 
3 ESF-TMA-MPBX-2 MPBX - Rock Mass 
Displacement 
-0.62 0.23 0.21 -0.62 7.25 0.25 0.5 7.57 7.00 0.03 13 7 Thermocouple 
Sensors between and 
at Anchors in MPBX 
4 ESF-TMA-MPBX-3 MPBX - Rock Mass 
Displacement 
0.75 0.10 0.24 0.78 7.00 1.29 0.5 7.57 7.00 0.03 9 1 6 Thermocouple 
Sensors between and 
at Anchors in MPBX 
5 ESF-TMA-MPBX-4 MPBX - Rock Mass 
Displacement 
6.43 3.50 -0.11 0.40 3.50 -0.21 0.5 7.57 6.20 0.03 12 1 6 Thermocouple 
Sensors between and 
at Anchors in MPBX 
6 ESF-TMA-OMPBX-1 Optical MPBX 1.19 -0.05 0.28 1.21 11.99 0.13 -0.5 7.57 12.00 0.05 Laser Reflection 
MPBX System 
7 ESF-TMA-OMPBX-2 Optical MPBX 6.20 6.49 -0.17 0.30 6.45 0.27 -0.5 7.57 6.20 0.03 Laser Reflection 
MPBX System 
8 ESF-TMA-TC-1 Thermocouple -0.18 0.15 0.28 -0.27 7.85 0.34 0.0 4.80 8.00 0.01 15 Thermocouple Probes 
Grouted in Borehole 
9 ESF-TMA-TC-2 Thermocouple 0.63 0.06 0.21 0.62 8.15 0.26 0.0 4.80 8.00 0.01 15 Thermocouple Probes 
Grouted in Borehole 
10 ESF-TMA-TC-3 Thermocouple -0.75 0.23 1.26 -0.71 8.05 1.31 0.0 4.80 8.00 0.01 15 Thermocouple Probes 
Grouted in Borehole 
11 ESF-TMA-TC-4 Thermocouple -0.02 0.03 0.69 -0.09 5.49 -0.77 0.0 4.80 8.00 0.01 15 Thermocouple Probes 
Grouted in Borehole 
12 ESF-TMA-TC-5 Thermocouple 0.00 0.16 0.65 -0.04 6.84 0.68 0.0 4.80 8.00 0.01 15 Thermocouple Probes 
Grouted in Borehole 
13 ESF-TMA-TC-6 Thermocouple 6.26 5.49 -0.01 1.87 5.46 -0.04 0.0 4.80 6.20 0.01 10 Thermocouple Probes 
Grouted in Borehole 
14 ESF-TMA-TC-7 Thermocouple -6.59 3.46 -0.01 -0.34 3.43 -0.02 0.0 6.00 6.20 0.02 10 Thermocouple Probes 
Grouted in Borehole 
15 ESF-TMA-NEU-1 Neutron Probe & Temp 6.10 4.29 0.33 -1.60 4.28 2.74 17.0 7.57 8.50 0.04 27 RTDs Grouted 
between Hole and 
Teflon Tube 
16 ESF-TMA-NEU-2 Hydrology 6.10 4.30 0.04 1.14 4.32 0.71 7.5 7.57 5.50 0.02 4 4 4 Pressure, RTD & 
Humidity Sensors in 
Packer Systems 
17 ESF-TMA-NEU-3 Neutron Probe & Temp 6.16 4.30 -0.45 -1.78 4.31 -1.47 -7.0 7.57 8.50 0.04 29 RTDs Grouted 
Between Borehole 
and Teflon Tube 
18 ESF-TMA-NEU-4 Hydrology 6.17 4.29 -0.22 1.51 4.28 -0.28 -0.5 7.57 5.00 0.02 4 4 4 Pressure, RTD & 
Humidity Sensors in 
Packer Systems 
19 ESF-TMA-BJ-1 Borehole Jack -6.55 5.52 -0.14 -0.34 5.51 -0.07 0.5 7.57 6.20 0.03 Open Hole for 
Borehole Jack 
20 ESF-TMA-CHE-1 Chemistry - SEAMIST -6.64 4.91 -0.66 -1.51 4.93 -0.77 -0.5 7.57 5.00 0.02 50 SEAMIST System 
with Chemical 
Sensors, 45 Sensors 
Failed

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.2-4 September 2002 
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.2-5 September 2002 
Table 6.2-2. SHT Borehole Information (continued) 
Types and No. of Sensors Comments 
Collar Coordinates 
(meters)1 
Bottom 
Coordinates 
(meters)1 
Orientation 
Degree 
Diameter 
(cm) 
Length 
(m) 
Volume 
(m3) 
Thermo- 
Couples 
RTD Thermistors Load Call 
(Average) 
Anchor 
in MPBX 
Type/Wire 
Extensometer 
Humidity 
Sensor 
Pressure 
Transducer 
Electrode 
Sensor 
(ERT) 
Chemistry 
Absorbing 
Pad 
Borehole 
Number 
Borehole 
Identification Primary Purpose 
X Y Z X Y Z 
21 ESF-TMA-CHE-2 Chemistry - SEAMIST -6.59 5.01 -0.01 -1.06 5.10 0.63 7.5 7.57 5.50 0.02 50 SEAMIST System with 
Chemical Sensors, 45 
Sensors Failed 
22 ESF-TMA-HYD-1 Neutron Probe & Temp -6.60 4.43 -0.66 -1.56 4.39 -0.74 -0.5 7.57 5.00 0.02 20 RTDs Grouted 
between Borehole and 
Teflon Tube 
23 EFS-TMA-HYD-2 Neutron Probe & Temp -6.57 4.43 0.00 -1.31 4.42 0.65 7.5 7.57 5.50 0.02 19 RTDs Grouted 
between Borehole and 
Teflon Tube 
24 ESF-TMA-ERT-1 Electrical Resistivity 
Tomography 
-6.56 3.89 0.12 -0.41 3.82 6.28 45.0 7.57 8.70 0.04 9 Electrical Resistivity 
Tomography, 
Electrode Sensor on 
1 m Intervals 
25 ESF-TMA-ERT-2 Electrical Resistivity 
Tomography 
-6.57 3.91 -0.13 -0.29 4.07 -6.22 -45.0 7.57 8.70 0.04 9 Electrical Resistivity 
Tomography, 
Electrode Sensor on 
1 m Intervals 
26 ESF-TMA-ERT-3 Electrical Resistivity 
Tomography 
6.25 3.89 -0.36 1.15 3.85 -5.71 -45.0 7.57 8.70 0.04 9 Electrical Resistivity 
Tomography, 
Electrode Sensor on 
1 m Intervals 
27 ESF-TMA-ERT-4 Electrical Resistivity 
Tomography 
6.25 3.90 0.36 0.38 3.97 6.29 45.0 7.57 8.70 0.04 9 Electrical Resistivity 
Tomography, 
Electrode Sensor on 
1 m Intervals 
28 ESF-TMA-RB-1 Rock Bolt w/Load Cell 0.14 0.05 -0.38 0.26 4.21 -0.38 0.0 5.72 4.00 0.01 1 1 Vibrating Wire Load 
Cell on Head of Rock 
Bolt 
29 ESF-TMA-RB-2 Rock Bolt w/Load Cell -0.23 0.00 -0.35 -0.18 4.22 -0.42 0.0 5.72 4.00 0.01 1 1 Vibrating Wire Load 
Cell on Head of Rock 
Bolt 
30 ESF-TMA-RB-3 Rock Bolt w/Load Cell 0.59 0.10 -0.31 0.60 4.03 -0.35 0.0 5.72 4.00 0.01 1 1 Vibrating Wire Load 
Cell on Head of Rock 
Bolt 
31 ESF-TMA-RB-4 Rock Bolt w/Load Cell -0.68 0.13 -0.29 -0.59 4.18 -0.23 0.0 5.72 4.00 0.01 1 1 Vibrating Wire Load 
Cell on Head of Rock 
Bolt 
32 ESF-TMA-RB-5 Rock Bolt w/Load Cell 0.14 -5.37 -0.39 0.06 -9.47 -0.41 0.0 5.72 4.00 0.01 1 1 Vibrating Wire Load 
Cell on Head of Rock 
Bolt 
33 ESF-TMA-RB-6 Rock Bolt w/Load Cell -0.20 -5.45 -0.42 -0.21 -9.45 -0.42 0.0 5.72 40.00 0.01 1 1 Vibrating Wire Load 
Cell on Head of Rock 
Bolt 
34 ESF-TMA-RB-7 Rock Bolt w/Load Cell 0.59 -5.49 -0.30 0.64 -9.60 -0.36 0.0 5.72 4.00 0.01 1 1 Vibrating Wire Load 
Cell on Head of Rock 
Bolt 
35 ESF-TMA-RB-8 Rock Bolt w/Load Cell -0.64 -5.38 -0.31 -0.73 -9.43 -0.45 0.0 5.72 4.00 0.01 1 1 Vibrating Wire Load 
Cell on Head of Rock 
Bolt 
36 ESF-TMA-TE-1 Tape Extensometer Array 3 -2.00 0.00 Multiple 0.0 2.54 Up to 0.5 1 4-pin Tape 
Extensometer Array 
37 ESF-TMA-TE-2 Tape Extensometer Array 3 2.00 0.00 Multiple 0.0 2.54 Up to 0.5 1 4-pin Tape 
Extensometer Array 
38 ESF-TMA-TE-3 Tape Extensometer Array 3 -6.50 3.00 Multiple 0.0 2.54 Up to 0.5 1 4-pin Tape 
Extensometer Array 
39 ESF-TMA-TE-4 Tape Extensometer Array 3 -6.50 5.10 Multiple 0.0 2.54 Up to 0.5 1 4-pin Tape 
Extensometer Array

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.2-6 September 2002 
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.2-7 September 2002 
Table 6.2-2. SHT Borehole Information (continued) 
Types and No. of Sensors Comments 
Collar Coordinates 
(meters)1 
Bottom 
Coordinates 
(meters)1 
Orientation 
Degree 
Diameter 
(cm) 
Length 
(m) 
Volume 
(m3) 
Thermo- 
Couples RTD Thermistors Load Call 
(Average) 
Anchor 
in MPBX 
Type/Wire 
Extensometer 
Humidity 
Sensor 
Pressure 
Transducer 
Electrode 
Sensor 
(ERT) 
Chemistry 
Absorbing 
Pad 
Borehole 
Number 
Borehole 
Identification Primary Purpose 
X Y Z X Y Z 
40 ESF-TMA-TE-5 Tape Extensometer Array 3 6.50 3.00 Multiple 0.0 2.54 Up to 0.5 1 4-pin Tape 
Extensometer Array 
41 ESF-TMA-TE-6 Tape Extensometer Array 3 6.50 5.00 Multiple 0.0 2.54 Up to 0.5 1 4-pin Tape 
Extensometer Array 
ESF-TMA-IN-THRM-1 
through 15 
Thermistors 15 5 Thermistors in the 
Insulation of Each Rib 
ESF-TMA-STC-1 
through 36 
Thermocouple 36 Surface 
Thermocouples 
Located on Each Rib 
ESF-ATC-1 through 3 Thermocouple 3 Surface 
Thermocouples 
Located on Each Rib 
ESF-TMA-WX-1 
through 6 
Wire Extensometer 6 6 Sets of Strain 
Measurements on Rib 
TOTAL 226.30 0.84 204 103 26 8 25 12 8 8 36 100 
TOTAL NUMBER OF SENSORS (ALL TYPES): 530 
NOTE: 1 Borehole Coordinates are Referenced to a 0.0.0 Coordinate Located at the Center of the Collar for the Heater Borehole

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.2-8 September 2002 
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.2-9 September 2002 
Table 6.2-3. SHT Post-Testing Borehole Information* 
Collar Coordinates (Cartesian) 1 
X Y Z 
Orientation Hole 
Diameter 
Hole 
Length* Borehole 
Number 
Borehole ID 
(ESF-TMA) Primary Purpose 
meters meters meters azim/decline cm meters 
194 PTC-H-1 Overcore Heater 0.00 0.00 0.00 az -288/ 0.5 deg 25.40 7.00 
195 - Deleted PTC-RB-1 Overcore Rock Bolt 0.18 0.00 -0.37 az -288/ 0.0 deg 15.24 4.00 
196 PTC-MPBX-1 Overcore MPBX 0.18 0.00 0.29 az -288/ 0.5 deg 15.24 7.00 
197 PTC-NEU-2 Overcore Hyd. 6.50 4.30 0.00 az 18/ 7.5 deg 15.24 6.00 
198 PTC-TC-6 Overcore TC 6.50 5.50 0.00 az 18/ 0.0 deg 15.24 6.50 
199 PTC-1 Observation 6.50 4.70 0.53 az 18/ 0.0 deg 7.57 7.50 
200 PTC-2 Observation 6.50 4.70 0.26 az 18/ -7.94 deg 7.57 8.10 
201 PTC-3 Observation 6.50 4.70 -0.28 az 18/ -22.68 deg 7.57 8.10 
202 PTC-4 Observation -0.31 0.00 0.18 az -288/ 0.0 deg 7.57 8.00 
203 PTC-5 Observation 0.40 0.00 0.25 az -288/ 0.0 deg 7.57 8.00 
204 PTC-6 Observation 1.14 0.00 0.50 az -288/ 9.8 deg 7.57 8.00 
NOTES: * From field survey 
1 +X-direction azimuth = 18 degrees (N); 
+Y-direction azimuth = 288 degrees (W); 
+Z-direction azimuth = vertically.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.2-10 September 2002 
Table 6.2.1.3-1. SHT Thermal Conductivity Laboratory Data for Four Specimens from Heater Borehole 1 
Thermal Conductivity (W/(m-K)) 
Apparatus(a) Temperature 
(.C) ESF-H1-0.6-B ESF-H1-11.3-B ESF-H1-11.6-B ESF-H1-19.9-B 
Mean Standard 
Deviation 
LT 30 1.50 1.76 1.37 1.76 1.60 0.20 
LT 50 1.52 1.79 1.40 1.77 1.62 0.19 
LT 70 1.54 1.81 1.44 1.77 1.64 0.18 
TCA 70 1.58 1.96 1.61 1.89 1.76 0.19 
TCA 110 1.56 1.88 1.57 1.80 1.70 0.16 
TCA 155 1.61 1.85 1.62 1.79 1.72 0.12 
TCA 200 1.60 1.82 1.59 1.78 1.70 0.12 
TCA 245 1.57 1.81 1.60 1.75 1.68 0.12 
TCA 289 1.48 1.76 1.56 1.69 1.62 0.13 
Mean 1.55 1.83 1.53 1.78 1.67 N/A 
Standard Deviation 0.04 0.06 0.10 0.05 N/A 0.15 
NOTE: (a) A low temperature (LT) device was used for testing at 70.C and below; a thermocouple apparatus (TCA) was used 
for 70.C and above.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.2-11 September 2002 
Table 6.2.2.4-1. Parameters for the Estimation of Pre-Heating SHT Air-Permeability, k, around Injection 
Zones for Various Boreholes 
Borehole and Data File ID Borehole 
Length (m) 
Borehole 
Radius 
(cm) 
Packed 
Zone, L (m) 
Constant 
Flow Rate, 
Q(SLPM) 
P2-P1 
(kPa) 
Estimated 
Permeability 
k(m2) 
Borehole 1 (5/24-03) 7.00 4.8 1.73 53. 35.0 1.5E-13 
Borehole 1 (5/28-08) 7.00 4.8 1.73 50. 32.5 1.5E-13 
Borehole 1 (5/30-14) 7.00 4.8 2.70 22. 9.5 1.8E-13 
Borehole 2 (5/28-06) 6.91 3.79 6.00 22. 13.4 7.2E-14 
Borehole 3 (5/28-02) 7.02 3.79 6.11 100. 22.3 1.8E-13 
Borehole 4 (5/28-03) 6.89 3.79 5.98 22. 77.0 9.2E-15 
Borehole 6 (5/30-07) 11.99 3.79 11.07 40. 20.0 5.1E-14 
Borehole 7 (5/31-01) 5.91 3.79 5.00 360. 10.7 1.7E-12 
Borehole 7 (5/31-07) 5.91 3.79 2.26 500. 16.0 2.9E-12 
Borehole 10 (5/24-02) 8.00 2.4 7.09 3. 10.6 1.2E-14 
Borehole 11 (5/28-04) 6.80 2.4 5.89 300. 3.0 5.2E-12 
Borehole 12 (5/28-05) 7.67 2.4 6.76 200. 37.0 2.1E-13 
Borehole 13 (5/30-08) 5.95 3.79 5.04 22. 16.5 6.6E-14 
Borehole 15 (5/29-14) 8.18 3.79 7.09 20. 48.0 1.4E-14 
Borehole 16 (5/30-09) 5.18 3.79 3.94 11. 64.0 8.3E-15 
Borehole 17 (5/28-07) 8.00 3.79 6.91 100. 1.5 2.8E-12 
Borehole 18 (5/30-10) 4.86 3.79 3.59 21. 15.5 8.8E-14 
Borehole 19 (5/31-04) 5.79 3.79 4.88 20. 6.6 1.6E-13 
Borehole 22 (5/29-02) 5.00 3.79 4.09 1. 6.4 9.9E-15 
Borehole 23 (5/29-01) 5.50 3.79 4.59 1. 11.0 5.0E-15 
Borehole 24 (5/31-03) 8.71 3.79 7.44 5. 15.7 1.2E-14 
Borehole 25 (5/31-02) 8.74 3.79 7.82 100. 7.8 4.6E-13 
Borehole 26 (5/31-05) 8.70 3.79 7.73 200. 6.8 1.1E-12 
Borehole 27 (5/30-13) 8.70 3.79 7.43 4.5 30.0 5.1E-15

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.2-12 September 2002 
Table 6.2.2.4-2. Input Parameters and Estimated Pre-heating Air Permeability, k(m2) for Consecutive 
0.69 Meter Zones from Injection Tests Between Straddle Packers in SHT Borehole 6 
Borehole 6 Data File and 
Straddle Zone ID 
Mid-zone 
Location from 
Collar (m) 
Constant Flow Rate, 
Q(SLPM) 
P2-P1 
(kPa) Permeability k(m2) 
(5/29-03) 3'-5' 1.22 1.03 47.00+ 4.0E-15+ 
(5/29-04) 5'-7' 1.83 0.39 65.00 1.0E-15 
(5/29-05) 7'-9' 2.44 0.62 57.20 1.9E-15 
(5/29-06) 9'-11' 3.05 0.62 58.00 1.9E-15 
(5/29-07) 11'-13' 3.66 0.62 * * 
(5/29-08) 13'-15' 4.27 2.04 * * 
(5/29-09) 15'-17' 4.88 2.01 58.00 6.1E-15 
(5/29-10) 17'-19' 5.49 2.01 24.50 1.7E-14 
(5/29-11) 19'-21' 6.10 2.01 28.00 1.4E-14 
(5/29-12) 21'-23' 6.71 4.00 17.20 5.0E-14 
(5/30-06) 23'-25' 7.32 4.02 8.00 1.1E-13 
(5/29-13) 25'-27' 7.92 42.00 25.00 3.4E-13 
(5/30-01) 25'-27' 7.92 40.50 25.20 3.3E-13 
(5/31-06) 25'-27' 7.92 41.00 27.00 3.1E-13 
(5/30-02) 27'-29' 8.53 2.00 6.20 7.3E-14 
(5/30-03) 29'-31' 9.14 2.03 13.00 3.4E-14 
(5/30-04) 31'-33' 9.75 2.03 14.00 3.1E-14 
(5/30-05) 33'-35' 10.36 2.00 0.75 6.2E-13 
* The pressure response to the constant injection flow rate is linear with time, indicative of injection into a nearly 
closed system, in other words, formation of a very low permeability. 
Table 6.2.2.4-3. Post-cooling Air Permeability, k (m2), for SHT Boreholes 1, 3, 6, 7, 16, 18, 19 
Injection Zone and Datafile ID 
Packed 
Zone 
L (m) 
Constant 
Flowrate. 
Q(SLPM) 
.P2-P1 
(kPa) 
k(m2) assuming 
Tf=30.6oC 
Borehole 1-Zone 1 (Jan21-08) 0.59 1 1.62 1.5E-13 
Borehole 1-Zone 2 (Jan21-09) 0.59 10 3.48 6.8E-13 
Borehole 1-Zone 3 (Jan21-10) 0.59 10 2.3 1.0E-12 
Borehole 1-Zone 4 (Jan21-11) 0.59 10 2.36 1.0E-12 
Borehole 1-Zone 5 (Jan21-13) 0.59 10 0.46 5.2E-12 
Borehole 1-Zone 6 (Jan21-12) 1.34 10 0.972 1.4E-12 
Borehole 3 (21Jan03) 6.11 40 3.22 5.7E-13 
Borehole 6 (21Jan04) 11.07 40 14.8 7.2E-14 
Borehole 7 (21Jan05) 5.00 100 2.17 2.5E-12 
Borehole 7-back zone (22Jan01) 2.43 100 2.15 4.5E-12 
Borehole 16 Zone 3 (Jan2106) 2.10 1 2.71 3.9E-14 
Borehole 18 Zone 3 (Jan2107) 1.55 10 4.9 2.7E-13 
Borehole 19 (21Jan02) 4.88 20 3.37 3.3E-13

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.2-13 September 2002 
Table 6.2.2.4-4. Comparison of Pre-heating and Post-cooling Air Permeability Measurements for SHT 
Boreholes 3, 6, 7, 16, 18, 19 
Pre-Heating Air Permeability 
(assume Tf=24.6oC) 
Post-Cooling Air Permeability 
(assume Tf=30.6oC) 
Borehole and Datafile ID L (m) k(m2) Borehole and Datafile ID L (m) k(m2) 
Post-Cooling/ 
Pre-Heating 
Ratio 
Borehole 3 (5/28-02) 6.11 1.8E-13 3 (21Jan-03) 6.11 5.7E-13 3.1 
Borehole 6 (5/30-07) 11.07 5.1E-14 6 (21Jan-04) 11.07 7.2E-14 1.4 
Borehole 7 (5/31-01) 5.00 1.7E-12 7 (21Jan-05) 5.00 2.5E-12 1.5 
Borehole 7 (5/31-07) 2.26 2.9E-12 7 (22Jan-01) 2.43 4.5E-12 1.6 
16 Zone 3 (Aug 7,8, 1996) 2.10 1.1E-14 16-Zone 3 (Jan21-06) 2.10 3.9E-14 3.5 
18 Zone 3 (Aug 7,8, 1996) 1.55 2.3E-13 18-Zone 3 (Jan21-07) 1.55 2.7E-13 1.2 
Borehole 19 (5/31-04) 4.88 1.6E-13 19 (21Jan-02) 4.88 3.3E-13 2.0 
Table 6.2.2.4-5. SHT Gas Tracer Test Results 
Tracer Injection 
(borehole 1, location 
w.r.t. collar) 
Withdrawal 
Location 
Borehole Number 
- Zone 
First Arrival Time Mass Recovery (qualitative 
analysis) 
3.93m  4.42m 16-Zone 3 3 minutes 100% within 30 minutes 
3.93m  4.42m 16-Zone 3 3 minutes 100% within 30 minutes 
3.93m  4.42m 18-Zone 3 7 minutes 100% within 15 hours 
5.05m  5.64m 16-Zone 3 12 minutes 50% within 1 hour 
5.05m  5.64m 18-Zone 3 8 minutes No analysis made

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.2-14 September 2002 
Table 6.2.2.5-1. SHT Pre-Heating Laboratory Hydrological Measurement of Wet-Drilled Cores 
Borehole 1, ESF-TMA-H1 
Sample Location 
(m) 
Saturation 
(%) 
Porosity 
(%) 
Bulk Density 
(g/cc) 
Particle Density 
(g/cc) 
Gravimetric Water 
Content 
(g/g) 
1.0 89.46 10.66 2.25 2.51 0.043 
2.5* 88.04 13.30 2.18 2.52 0.054 
3.7 93.60 8.87 2.29 2.52 0.036 
4.7 97.27 11.83 2.22 2.51 0.051 
5.7 93.97 13.83 2.16 2.51 0.061 
6.7 96.03 11.89 2.21 2.51 0.052 
* contains small voids 
Borehole 6, ESF-TMA-OMPBX-1 
Sample Location 
(m) 
Saturation 
(%) 
Porosity 
(%) 
Bulk Density 
(g/cc) 
Particle Density 
(g/cc) 
Gravimetric Water 
Content 
(g/g) 
0.2 94.82 11.00 2.24 2.51 0.047 
2.4 94.75 10.43 2.25 2.51 0.044 
4.4 93.58 10.18 2.26 2.51 0.042 
7.5* 96.87 23.62 1.96 2.57 0.104 
Subcore 20.44 2.02 2.53 
9.3 96.17 11.55 2.22 2.52 0.050 
11.3 93.07 9.74 2.27 2.51 0.040 
* split along axis during oven drying 
Borehole 5, ESF-TMA-MPBX-4 
Sample Location 
(m) 
Saturation 
(%) 
Porosity 
(%) 
Bulk Density 
(g/cc) 
Particle Density 
(g/cc) 
Gravimetric Water 
Content 
(g/g) 
0.7* 95.85 17.03 2.05 2.48 0.079 
2.1* 101.61 9.69 2.25 2.49 0.044 
2.6# 102.17 13.33 2.17 2.50 0.063 
3.8# 96.74 10.58 2.24 2.50 0.046 
Subcore 10.44 2.24 2.50 
5.4 97.65 9.60 2.27 2.51 0.040 
* contains open fractures and large vugs. 
# received in fragments 
Borehole Summary 
Saturation 
(%) 
Porosity 
(%) 
Bulk Density 
(g/cc) 
Particle Density 
(g/cc) 
Gravimetric Water 
Content 
( / ) SHT average: 95.39 12.53 2.20 2.51 0.053 
standard deviation 3.56 3.89 0.09 0.02 0.017

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.2-15 September 2002 
Table 6.2.2.5-2. Pre-Heating Laboratory Hydrological Measurement of Grab Samples from Wet 
Excavation of the Observation Drift of the ESF Thermal Test Facility 
Observation Drift Grab Samples 
Sample 
Location 
(m) 
Saturation 
(%) 
Porosity 
(%) 
Bulk Density 
(g/cc) 
Particle Density 
(g/cc) 
Gravimetric 
Water Content 
(g/g) 
30.0 99.00 8.60 2.26 2.47 0.038 
Sub-sample 94.90 8.30 2.27 2.47 0.035 
40.0 95.40 9.30 2.27 2.50 0.039 
Sub-sample 93.80 10.10 2.24 2.49 0.042 
Sub-sample 80.50 10.40 2.24 2.50 0.037 
Observation Drift (OD) Grab Sample Summary 
Saturation 
(%) 
Porosity 
(%) 
Bulk Density 
(g/cc) 
Particle Density 
(g/cc) 
Gravimetric 
Water Content 
(g/g) 
OD Average 92.72 9.34 2.26 2.49 0.038 
Standard 
Deviation 
7.10 0.91 0.02 0.02 0.003 
Table 6.2.2.5-3. SHT Bulk Densities and Porosity of Cores from Boreholes 20 and 21 
Sample ID Borehole Depth 
(m) 
Wet Bulk 
Density 
(g/cm3) 
Dry Bulk 
Density 
(g/cm3) 
Effective 
Porosity 
0047525.2 CHE-1 0.7 2.348 2.247 0.102 
0047525.2A CHE-1 0.7 2.350 2.249 0.102 
0047526.2 CHE-1 1.4 2.349 2.240 0.109 
0047527.2 CHE-1 2.5 2.345 2.246 0.0998 
0047528.2 CHE-1 3.8 2.331 2.224 0.107 
0047529.2 CHE-1 4.3 2.344 2.235 0.109 
0047530.2A CHE-2 4.5 2.294 2.167 0.127 
0047531.2 CHE-2 1.5 2.332 2.222 0.111 
0047533.2 CHE-2 3.9 2.290 2.156 0.135 
0047534.2 CHE-2 4.6 2.331 2.229 0.103 
0047535.2 CHE-2 5.4 2.314 2.195 0.119 
Mean* 11 samples 2.330.02 2.220.03 0.1110.011 
.Statistical mean for 11 samples; errors represent one standard deviation for all samples collectively

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.2-16 September 2002 
Table 6.2.2.5-4. SHT Laboratory Hydrological Measurements of Post-Cooling Dry-Drilled Cores 
Sample ID LBNL ID Saturation Porosity Bulk Density 
(g/cc) 
Particle 
Density 
(g/cc) 
Gravimetric 
Water Content 
(g/g) 
SPC01009880 H-1 0.50 0.169 1.96 2.36 0.043 
SPC01009882 H-2 0.79 0.105 2.19 2.44 0.038 
SPC01009884 H-3 0.75 0.115 2.16 2.44 0.040 
SPC01009885 H-4 0.44 0.099 2.20 2.44 0.020 
SPC01009887 H-5 0.19 0.101 2.18 2.42 0.009 
SPC01009888 H-6 0.32 0.110 2.17 2.43 0.016 
SPC01009889 H-7 0.80 0.104 2.19 2.45 0.038 
SPC01009806 H-8 0.80 0.098 2.19 2.43 0.035 
SPC01009807 H-9 0.61 0.099 2.19 2.43 0.027 
SPC01009808 H-10 0.82 0.090 2.21 2.43 0.033 
SPC01009809 H-11 0.78 0.092 2.20 2.42 0.033 
SPC01009810 H-12 0.53 0.105 2.16 2.41 0.026 
SPC01009811 H-13 0.38 0.097 2.19 2.43 0.017 
SPC01009812 H-14 0.41 0.089 2.21 2.43 0.016 
SPC01009890 H-15 0.76 0.090 2.21 2.43 0.031 
SPC01009891 H-16 0.87 0.102 2.17 2.42 0.041 
SPC01009892 H-17 0.89 0.101 2.18 2.42 0.041 
SPC01009893 H-18 0.94 0.093 2.20 2.43 0.040 
SPC01009894 H-19 0.83 0.106 2.17 2.43 0.041 
SPC01009895 H-20 0.85 0.087 2.24 2.45 0.033 
SPC01009896 H-21 0.89 0.082 2.22 2.42 0.033 
SPC01009897 H-22 0.73 0.131 2.12 2.44 0.044 
SPC01009898 H-23 0.86 0.104 2.17 2.42 0.041 
SPC01009899 H-24 0.86 0.099 2.20 2.44 0.039 
SPC01009900 H-25 0.82 0.117 2.15 2.44 0.045 
SPC01009901 H-26 0.86 0.103 2.20 2.45 0.040 
SPC01009902 H-27 0.77 0.143 2.09 2.44 0.053 
SPC01009903 H-28 0.88 0.087 2.23 2.44 0.034 
0.104 2.18 2.43 Average 
Standard Deviation 0.018 0.05 0.02

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.2-17 September 2002 
Table 6.2.3.1-1. Wire Extensometer Data (a) 
Days after Startup 
Gage 
0 14 28 42 56 70 84 98 112 126 
TMA-WX-1 0 -0.1 0.08 0.02 0.03 0.27 0.2 0.33 0.49 0.47 
TMA-WX-2 0 -0.14 -0.15 -0.12 3.16 3.21 3.26 3.27 3.29 3.27 
TMA-WX-3 0 -0.03 -0.09 0.01 0.01 0.2 0.25 0.31 0.33 0.41 
TMA-WX-4 0 -0.83 -0.78 -0.78 -0.78 -0.58 -0.49 -0.66 -0.63 -0.31 
TMA-WX-5 0 -0.61 -0.66 -0.58 -0.52 -0.5 -0.44 -0.67 -0.4 -0.58 
TMA-WX-6 0 -2.45 -2.46 -1.98 -1.88 -1.89 -1.83 -2.95 -2.97 -2.97 
Days after Startup 
Gage 
140 154 168 182 196 210 224 238 252 266 
TMA-WX-1 0.39 0.66 0.66 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.44 0.59 
TMA-WX-2 3.17 3.52 3.51 3.51 3.51 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.41 3.38 
TMA-WX-3 0.28 0.69 -23.92 -23.92 -23.84 -23.99 -24.08 -24.08 -24 -24.03 
TMA-WX-4 -0.59 -0.2 -0.21 -0.04 -0.04 -0.09 -0.09 -0.1 -0.1 -0.12 
TMA-WX-5 -0.89 -0.48 -0.59 -0.65 -0.78 -0.82 -0.82 -0.83 -0.81 -0.82 
TMA-WX-6 -3.21 -2.75 -2.91 -2.74 -2.74 -3.06 -3.06 -3.06 -2.96 -2.92 
Days after Startup 
Gage 
280 294 308 322 336 350 364 378 392 
TMA-WX-1 0.46 0.22 0.01 -0.05 -5.89 -5.89 -6.4 -6.56 -6.63 
TMA-WX-2 4.49 4.49 4.22 4.22 3.99 4.11 4.04 4.04 3.93 
TMA-WX-3 -23.91 -24.16 -24.16 -23.91 -24.42 -24.42 -24.42 -24.68 -24.66 
TMA-WX-4 -0.17 -0.17 -0.17 -0.17 -0.68 -0.42 -0.68 -0.90 -0.91 
TMA-WX-5 -0.69 -0.69 -0.95 -0.95 -0.95 -1.2 -38.29 -38.61 -38.65 
TMA-WX-6 -2.99 -3.25 -3.5 -3.5 -3.75 -3.75 -3.5 -3.77 -3.83 
Days after Startup 
Gage 
406 420 434 448 462 476 490 504 518 
TMA-WX-1 -6.40 -6.65 -3.93 -5.52 -5.54 -4.11 -2.31 -2.01 -2.39 
TMA-WX-2 2.97 2.97 2.85 0.37 0.67 0.22 -21.04 -20.51 -20.89 
TMA-WX-3 -24.67 -24.67 -24.72 -24.71 -24.65 -24.65 1.19 1.92 1.46 
TMA-WX-4 -0.68 -0.68 -0.91 -0.91 -0.89 -0.87 -53.45 -53.42 -53.48 
TMA-WX-5 -38.54 -38.54 -38.72 -38.76 -38.98 -38.99 1.72 1.55 -3.99 
TMA-WX-6 -3.75 -3.50 -3.80 -3.79 -3.74 -3.71 -3.6 -3.42 -3.66 
(a) Wire extensometer data given in mm. Extension is positive.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.2-18 September 2002 
Table 6.2.3.1-2. Tape Extensometer Measurements for the SHT* 
Gage No. Initial 
Reading (m) 
Displ. 
9/24/96 
(mm) 
Displ. 
10/21/96 
(mm) 
Displ. 
12/19/96 
(mm) 
.Displ. 
1/7/97 
(mm) 
Displ. 
2/11/97 
(mm) 
Displ. 
3/10/97 
(mm) 
WXM-1 5.40439 -0.48 -0.78 -0.86 -0.76 -1.14 -1.19 
WXM-2 5.08585 -3.20 -3.20 -1.17 -3.71 -3.71 -3.71 
WXM-3* 4.67249 0.33 erroneous 0.08 -1.93 2.24 
WXM-4 4.33635 -0.46 -0.21 -0.56 -0.64 -0.84 erroneous 
WXM-5 5.87639 -0.04 -0.32 -0.49 -0.57 -0.37 -0.82 
WXM-6 5.83158 -0.29 -0.129 -0.17 -0.39 -0.72 -0.80 
Gage No. Displ. 
4/21/97 
(mm) 
Displ. 5/6/97 
(mm) 
Displ. 
6/25/97 
(mm) 
Displ. 
7/24/97 
(mm) 
Displ. 
8/20/97 
(mm) 
Displ. 
7/15/97 
(mm) 
WXM-1 -1.27 -0.86 -1.39 -1.52 -1.34 -1.16 
WXM-2 erroneous -4.39 -4.21 -4.21 -4.21 -3.71 
WXM-3** 0.26 0.31 -0.17 2.29 -0.07 0.26 
WXM-4 -0.36 -0.18 -1.17 -1.22 -1.20 -1.50 
WXM-5 -0.72 -0.79 -0.88 -0.95 -0.62 -0.60 
WXM-6 -0.64 -0.31 -1.15 -0.95 -0.21 -0.64 
Notes: * Extension is positive. 
** WXM-3 initial reading suspect. Change in displacement from 9/24/96. 
Table 6.2.3.1-3. Summary of SNL-Installed Measurement System Specifications 
Measurement System Manufacturer Gage Accuracy, Range & Precision 
Type-K Thermocouples 
(Chromel-Alumel) 
STI (probes) 
Omega 
2.2C 
max 1280C 
Vibrating Wire Displacement 
Transducers 
GeoKon 1 in. full range 
Resolution: .02% 
High-Temp LVDT RDP 0.5% of full range = 19 mm @200C 
Wire Extensometer Houston Scientific, Inc. 0.1% resolution 
2-in. range 
Vibrating Wire Load Cell GeoKon 60,000 lb max 
0.5% full range 
Tape Extensometer GeoKon 0.127 mm 
Goodman Jack 
-Readout Box 
-Near LVDT 
-Far LVDT 
-Pressure Gage 
-Enerpak Pump 
Sinco Range: 
pressure: 010,000 psi 
displacement: -0.25 to +0.25 in. 
Accuracy: 
pressure: 0.2% 
displacement: 0.005 in. 
Power Monitor Magtrol Volts (0.2% of reading +0.2% of range) 0600 volts 
Amps (0.22% of reading +0.25% of range) 050 amps 
Watts (0.2% of reading +0.3% of range) 
Thermistors Omega 0.2C 
100C range

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.2-19 September 2002 
Table 6.2.3.2-1. Estimated Rock Mass Modulus in Borehole ESF-TMA-BJ-1 (Goodman/Borehole Jack) 
Date Distance from Collar 
2.0 m 3.0 m 4.0 m 4.51 m 6.2 m 
Rock Mass Modulus-GPa (Temp C) 
8/26/96 6.9 (25) 3.71 (25) No test No test No test 
10/10/96 10.3 (27.5) 10.3 (27.7) 8.3 (30.2) 6.0 (34) No test 
11/26/96 Results discarded (31.1) 10.2 (35.9) 5.71 (46.4) 5.01 (55.4) 8.4 (141.8) 
3/18/97 Results discarded (35) 6.3 (41) 10.3 (52) 5.7 (58.7) 22.8 (143.1) 
10/23/97 1st run No test No test 6.28 (Ambient) Discarded 8.28 (Ambient) 
10/23/97 2nd run No test No test 8.97 (Ambient) 7.1 (Ambient) 10.0 (Ambient) 
1/29/98 1st run 5.47 (Ambient) 9.67 (Ambient) 8.28 (Ambient) 7.60 (Ambient) Not calculated 
1/29/98 2nd run No test No test No test No test 11.72 (Ambient) 
1/29/98 3rd run No test No test No test No test 11.72 (Ambient) 
NOTE: Italicized calculated moduli are based on field data in which the difference between the two borehole jack 
LVDT readings slightly exceeded the limits set in ASTM D 4971-89 1989 [101786]. The fractured nature of 
the rock made setting the jack difficult. Discarded results were for data that far exceeded ASTM D 4971-89 
1989 [101786] limits.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.2-20 September 2002 
Table 6.2.3.3-1. Rock Bolt Load Cells, Load Versus Time (a) 
TMA RBLC Days after Startup 
Gage 0 14 28 42 56 70 84 98 112 126 
RB-LC-1-AVG 22662 22262.8 22158 21732.3 21537.1 21444.1 21407.5 21380.8 21340.3 21308.5 
RB-LC-2-AVG 14859.4 14739.7 14708.6 14680.1 14643.7 14597 14559.8 14522.5 14496.5 14449.6 
RB-LC-3-AVG 22428 22402.2 22378.7 22348.4 22317.5 22281 22262.3 22243.2 22231 22224.1 
RB-LC-4-AVG 16663.9 16602.8 16580.3 16558.8 16522.1 16496.6 16467.4 16446.3 16424.2 16407.5 
RB-LC-5-AVG 25971.9 25928.5 25887 25856.6 25829.3 25802.6 25783.4 25765.5 25748.7 25738.1 
RB-LC-6-AVG 14642.7 14633.2 14632.7 14627.3 14619.4 14609.5 14601.2 14595.9 14589.2 14573.7 
RB-LC-7-AVG 4932.6 4921.1 4919.7 4911.8 4904.3 4893.6 4890.9 4883.8 4877.5 4873 
RB-LC-8-AVG 16862.8 16818.5 16783.6 16758.7 16738.7 16605 16592.7 16575.4 16566 16561.5 
TMA RBLC Days after Startup 
Gage 140 154 168 182 196 210 224 238 252 266 
RB-LC-1-AVG 21279.7 21254.3 21206.3 21176.9 21161.2 21145.9 21127.1 21112.2 21100.9 21102.1 
RB-LC-2-AVG 14422.7 14405.6 14389.9 14378.6 14369.9 14365.5 14353.4 14349 14342 14341.1 
RB-LC-3-AVG 22214.2 22206.8 22201.1 22194.3 22189.6 22183.4 22176.4 22171.7 22165.3 22158.4 
RB-LC-4-AVG 16394.3 16377.4 16361.5 16350.8 16340.4 16331 16320.2 16316.8 16312.1 16310.9 
RB-LC-5-AVG 25728.1 25722.2 25714.1 25705.1 25698.3 25692.7 25683.1 25676 25665.6 25652 
RB-LC-6-AVG 14567.1 14563.5 14562.3 14557.4 14553.9 14551.2 14549.3 14543.8 14543.4 14538.9 
RB-LC-7-AVG 4866.9 4866.7 4867.2 4866.6 4868.2 4865.2 4863.2 4863.9 4864.1 4867.1 
RB-LC-8-AVG 16552.8 16544.8 16538 16533.3 16528.6 16522.3 16516.4 16514 16503.2 16501.5 
TMA RBLC Days after Startup 
Gage 280 294 308 322 336 350 364 378 392 
RB-LC-1-AVG 21090.8 21092.2 21097.1 21090.6 21081.3 21070.5 21066.3 21073.0 21072.7 
RB-LC-2-AVG 14354.1 14380.2 14391.6 14396.8 14404.6 14409 14412.4 14416.8 14421.9 
RB-LC-3-AVG 22160.3 22171.6 22179.8 22180.8 22182.1 22179.1 22180.2 22177.4 22179.1 
RB-LC-4-AVG 16315.9 16332.3 16338.5 16340.7 16346.6 16348.2 16350.4 16354.0 16358.0 
RB-LC-5-AVG 25641.1 25617.7 25604.4 25589.9 25581.9 25573.8 25571.5 25561.4 25555.1 
RB-LC-6-AVG 14538.6 14538.2 14536.1 14534.8 14531.9 14531.1 14529.5 14528.5 14530.7 
RB-LC-7-AVG 4865 4858.2 4857.6 4856.9 4851 4850.2 4850.1 4852.8 4853.3 
RB-LC-8-AVG 16497.8 16491.7 16491.7 16488.4 16487 16484.6 16477.2 16480.8 16475.8 
TMA RBLC Days after Startup 
Gage 406 420 434 448 462 476 490 504 518 
RB-LC-1-AVG 21080.6 21074.6 21058.0 21019.0 20999.9 20964.1 20943.1 20933.8 20928.1 
RB-LC-2-AVG 14439.3 14435.0 14432.4 14419.5 14391.8 14352.8 14338.9 14347.6 14346.7 
RB-LC-3-AVG 22183.0 22179.8 22177.4 22168.4 22150.2 22111.5 22097.6 22099.3 22096.8 
RB-LC-4-AVG 16366.6 16360.9 16354.1 16345.6 16330.8 16282.0 16234.2 16268.6 16278.5 
RB-LC-5-AVG 25548.7 25535.6 25525.3 25515.4 25496.9 25457.7 25444.7 25445.6 25445.2 
RB-LC-6-AVG 14534.1 14533.1 14532.5 14528.0 14521.6 14503.0 14493.0 14492.2 14490.9 
RB-LC-7-AVG 4856.6 4860.1 4858.9 4854.8 4842.0 4808.4 4796.1 4795.0 4680.1 
RB-LC-8-AVG 16476.1 16468.7 16462.1 16454.2 16079.7 16060.3 16052.3 16056.2 16058.1 
(a) Load cell data are for average load and are given in lbs.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.2-21 September 2002 
Table 6.2.3.4-1. Mean Coefficients of Thermal Expansion during First Cycle Heating of Post-Cooling SHT Characterization Specimens 
Specimen ID Distance Max. Mean CTE on Heat-up (10-6/C) 
from collar 
(ft) 
Temp. 
(oC) 
25-50 50-75 75-100 100-125 125-150 150-175 175-200 200-225 225-250 250-275 275-300 300-325 
Perpendicular to Heater, Outside 100C Isotherm 
PTC1-A 2.9-B 2.9 322 8.7 9.6 9.8 11.2 12.3 13.1 14.6 19.4 32.7 56.3 75.0 52.3 
PTC1-A 16.8-B 16.8 321 9.1 11.0 9.6 10.4 11.3 12.5 12.3 15.8 20.3 33.2 62.1 49.8 
PTC2-B 4.1-B 4.1 321 9.2 10.5 9.9 10.3 11.1 12.3 12.8 16.4 23.8 43.1 61.4 45.6 
Compilation without N(a) = 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 
cooling outlier Mean = 9.0 10.4 9.8 10.7 11.6 12.6 13.2 17.2 25.6 44.2 66.2 49.2 
PTC1-A 2.9-B STD(a) = 0.3 0.7 0.1 0.5 0.7 0.4 1.2 1.9 6.4 11.6 7.7 3.4 
Perpendicular to Heater, Inside 100C Isotherm 
PTC1-B19.0-B 19.0 322 9.0 10.1 8.9 9.4 10.8 12.9 13.5 16.0 20.4 30.6 51.4 54.0 
Parallel to Heater, Outside 100C Isotherm 
PTC4-A 4.6 B 4.6 321 8.8 10.0 8.3 9.5 10.5 11.9 11.2 13.9 20.1 34.1 81.4 69.0 
PTC5-B 4.1-B 4.6 321 8.7 10.4 8.9 9.6 10.6 11.6 11.7 14.5 34.2 38.5 57.0 63.1 
PTC5-B 24.4-B 4.6 321 8.9 10.5 8.6 9.4 10.2 11.2 11.1 14.1 17.9 26.7 47.5 52.9 
PTC5-B 24.4-C 4.6 331 8.8 9.9 8.5 9.3 10.2 11.4 12.6 17.2 21.5 34.5 59.9 45.1 
N(a) = 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 
Mean = 8.8 10.2 8.6 9.5 10.4 11.5 11.7 14.9 23.4 33.5 61.5 57.5 
STD(a) = 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.7 1.5 7.3 4.9 14.3 10.6 
Parallel to Heater, Inside 100C Isotherm 
PTC4-A 6.8-B 6.8 318 7.9 8.8 9.1 9.4 10.5 11.1 12.4 15.4 24.3 38.0 70.2 73.0 
PTC4-B 14.8-B 14.8 321 9.0 10.3 8.6 9.3 10.4 12.0 12.4 15.0 19.2 28.1 45.8 52.2 
PTC4-A 19.0-B 19.0 319 8.1 8.9 8.9 9.2 10.1 11.1 12.4 14.5 17.5 28.0 51.0 56.9 
PTC4-B 19.8-B 19.8 318 8.4 9.1 9.4 9.8 10.6 11.5 12.9 15.4 19.2 27.8 44.2 44.4 
PTC H1-A 15.6-B 15.6 322 7.66 9.48 8.24 9.11 10.19 10.65 11.05 12.33 14.63 22.02 41.38 54.172 
PTC MPBX1 14.2-B 14.2 322 8.51 9.64 8.49 9.04 9.86 11.50 11.82 15.29 20.75 28.98 50.49 55.86 
N(a) = 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 
Mean = 8.2 9.4 8.8 9.3 10.3 11.3 12.2 14.7 19.3 28.8 50.5 56.1 
STD(a) = 0.5 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.6 1.2 3.2 5.1 10.3 9.4 
All Data Outside 100C Isotherm 
N(a) = 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 
Mean = 8.9 10.3 9.1 10.0 10.9 12.0 12.3 15.9 24.4 38.1 63.5 54.0 
STD(a) = 0.2 0.4 0.7 0.7 0.8 0.7 1.2 2.0 6.5 9.5 11.3 8.9 
All Data Inside 100C Isotherm 
N(a) = 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 
Mean = 8.3 9.5 8.8 9.3 10.4 11.5 12.3 14.9 19.4 29.1 50.6 55.8 
STD(a) = 0.5 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.3 0.8 0.8 1.2 3.0 4.7 9.4 8.6 
All Data 
N(a) = 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 
Mean = 8.6 9.9 9.0 9.6 10.6 11.8 12.3 15.4 21.9 33.6 57.1 54.9 
STD(a) = 0.5 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.7 1.0 1.7 5.5 8.6 12.0 8.5 
95% (a) 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.9 2.9 4.5 6.3 4.5 
(a) N = Number of samples; STD = Standard deviation; 95% = 95 Percent Confidence Limit 
Lithostratigraphic Unit: Tptpmn; Thermal/mechanical Unit TSw2; Air dried.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.2-22 September 2002 
Table 6.2.3.4-2. Mean Coefficients of Thermal Expansion during First Cycle Cooling of Post-Cooling SHT Characterization Specimens 
Specimen ID Distance Max. Mean CTE on Cool-Down (10-6/C) 
from collar 
(ft) 
Temp. 
(oC) 
325-300 300-275 275-250 250-225 225-200 200-175 175-150 150-125 125-100 100-75 75-50 50-30 
Perpendicular to Heater, Outside 100C Isotherm 
PTC1-A 2.9-B 2.9 322 12.2 16.5 31.8 21.6 67.2 35.4 22.1 15.2 13.2 15.0 11.6 11.4 
PTC1-A 16.8-B 16.8 321 16.1 30.2 42.1 39.5 26.3 19.2 15.1 12.9 12.1 10.7 10.2 9.7 
PTC2-B 4.1-B 4.1 321 14.9 27.8 43.8 48.0 30.1 20.4 15.6 13.3 12.3 10.8 10.2 9.6 
Compilation without N(a) = 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 
cooling outlier Mean = 15.5 29.0 42.9 43.7 28.2 19.8 15.4 13.1 12.2 10.7 10.2 9.6 
PTC1-A 2.9-B STD(a) = 0.9 1.7 1.2 6.0 2.7 0.9 0.4 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 
Perpendicular to Heater, Inside 100C Isotherm 
PTC1-B19.0-B 19.0 322 18.8 32.2 38.3 32.9 22.9 18.0 15.0 12.7 12.3 10.3 10.2 9.1 
Parallel to Heater, Outside 100C Isotherm 
PTC4-A 4.6 B 4.6 321 14.2 29.3 50.7 53.8 29.6 20.7 15.8 13.7 12.6 11.5 10.4 10.4 
PTC5-B 4.1-B 4.6 321 15.1 31.8 43.4 40.4 29.2 31.2 17.1 13.5 12.7 11.2 10.4 9.9 
PTC5-B 24.4-B 4.6 321 19.1 29.9 35.9 32.0 21.9 16.6 14.0 11.9 11.5 10.2 9.7 9.1 
PTC5-B 24.4-C 4.6 331 18.6 28.1 40.9 41.1 27.8 22.1 15.8 12.9 11.9 10.5 9.8 9.2 
N(a) = 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 
Mean = 16.8 29.8 42.7 41.8 27.1 22.7 15.7 13.0 12.2 10.8 10.1 9.7 
STD(a) = 2.5 1.5 6.1 9.0 3.6 6.2 1.3 0.8 0.6 0.6 0.4 0.6 
Parallel to Heater, Inside 100C Isotherm 
PTC4-A 6.8-B 6.8 318 12.2 26.6 39.0 45.8 33.5 26.0 17.5 14.0 12.2 11.9 10.4 9.8 
PTC4-B 14.8-B 14.8 321 16.6 29.5 36.5 33.1 23.7 18.1 14.6 12.5 11.8 10.4 9.9 9.3 
PTC4-A 19.0-B 19.0 319 16.9 29.2 38.3 34.6 23.4 17.5 13.7 12.3 11.2 9.7 9.7 10.0 
PTC4-B 19.8-B 19.8 318 19.8 26.6 31.2 29.8 22.5 18.2 14.0 12.3 11.4 10.8 10.0 9.4 
PTC H1-A 15.6-B 15.6 322 19.33 30.87 32.25 24.14 18.09 14.42 12.59 11.20 10.55 10.03 9.29 20.154 
PTC MPBX1 14.2-B 14.2 322 17.89 30.67 39.41 33.88 23.31 18.80 15.12 12.42 11.60 10.27 9.79 8.99 
N(a) = 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 
Mean = 17.1 28.9 36.1 33.6 24.1 18.9 14.6 12.5 11.5 10.5 9.9 11.3 
STD(a) = 2.7 1.9 3.6 7.1 5.1 3.8 1.7 0.9 0.6 0.8 0.4 4.4 
All Data Outside 100C Isotherm (Without cooling outlier PTC1-A 2.9-B) 
N(a) = 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 
Mean = 16.3 29.5 42.8 42.4 27.5 21.7 15.6 13.0 12.2 10.8 10.1 9.7 
STD(a) = 2.1 1.4 4.8 7.6 3.1 5.0 1.0 0.6 0.4 0.5 0.3 0.5 
All Data Inside 100C Isotherm 
N(a) = 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 
Mean = 17.4 29.4 36.4 33.5 23.9 18.7 14.7 12.5 11.6 10.5 9.9 11.0 
STD(a) = 2.5 2.1 3.4 6.5 4.7 3.5 1.5 0.8 0.6 0.7 0.4 4.1 
All Data (Without cooling outlier PTC1-A 2.9-B)
N(a) = 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 
Mean = 16.9 29.4 39.4 37.6 25.6 20.1 15.1 12.7 11.8 10.6 10.0 10.4 
STD(a) = 2.3 1.8 5.1 8.2 4.3 4.4 1.4 0.8 0.6 0.6 0.3 3.0 
95% (a) 1.3 1.0 2.8 4.4 2.3 2.4 0.7 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.2 1.6 
(a) N = Number of samples; STD = Standard deviation; 95% = 95 Percent Confidence Limit 
Lithostratigraphic Unit: Tptpmn; Thermal/mechanical Unit TSw2; Air dried.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.2-23 September 2002 
Table 6.2.3.4-3. Summary Data: SHT Post-Cooling Characterization Unconfined Compression Tests 
Specimen ID (a) PTC4-B 
9.2 
PTC4-B 
4.3 
PTC4-B 
6.6 
PTC4 
11.8 
PTC4 
17.4 
PTC4 
20.9 
PTC4-B 
26.0 
PTC2-B 
10.8 
PTCH1 8.6 
Date Tested 21-07-98 22-07-98 22-07-98 23-07-98 23-07-98 23-07-98 24-07-98 24-07-98 24-07-98 
Thermal/Mechanical Unit TSw2 TSw2 TSw2 TSw2 TSw2 TSw2 TSw2 TSw2 TSw2 
Lithostratigraphic Unit Tptpmn Tptpmn Tptpmn Tptpmn Tptpmn Tptpmn Tptpmn Tptpmn Tptpmn 
Dry Bulk Density 2.25 2.27 2.26 2.32 2.30 2.32 2.31 2.21 2.30 
Moisture Content (%) 1.1 1.0 0.8 0.9 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.0 1.0 
Confining Pressure 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
Static Young's Modulus 
(GPa) 
34.4 33.4 32.3 37.0 34.0 34.4 32.9 20.1 34.3 
Static Poisson's Ratio 0.185 0.168 0.166 0.259 0.182 0.187 0.178 0.251 0.159 
Peak Stress 175.4 34.3 113.9 144.9 240.5 245.7 191.4 51.8 80.5 
Axial Strain at Peak 
Stress 
0.005274 0.001138 0.003637 0.008941 0.007924 0.007909 0.006003 0.00213 0.002629 
Test ID SHTUC11 SHTUC13 SHTUC14 SHTUC15 SHTUC16 Statistical Summary (b) 
Specimen ID(a) PTCH1 
15.6 
PTCH1 
18.7 
PTC1 
12.5 
PTC 
MPBX1-B 
14.4 
PTC1-B 
15.7 
Mean Standard 
Deviation 
Count 95% 
Confidence 
Limit 
Date Tested 27-07-98 28-07-98 29-07-98 29-07-98 30-07-98 
Thermal/Mechanical Unit TSw2 TSw2 TSw2 TSw2 TSw2 
Lithostratigraphic Unit Tptpmn Tptpmn Tptpmn Tptpmn Tptpmn 
Dry Bulk Density 2.23 2.28 2.29 2.31 2.21 
Moisture Content (%) 1.3 0.9 1.1 0.9 0.9 
Confining Pressure 0 0 0 0 0 
Static Young's Modulus 
(GPa) 
24.2 34.2 26.6 35.4 28.9 31.6 4.8 14 2.5 
Static Poisson's Ratio 0.123 0.173 0.393 0.168 0.183 0.198 0.066 14 0.034 
Peak Stress 38.7 137.0 78.7 183.5 159.2 134.0 70.2 14 36.8 
Axial Strain at Peak 
Stress 
0.002316 0.004349 0.001641 0.005806 0.005614 0.004665 0.002521 14 0.001321 
a The distance from the borehole collar (in feet) is given as part of the specimen identification number. 
b Tests SHTUC01, SHTUC12, and SHTUC17 were conducted on an aluminum specimen. 
Table 6.2.3.5-1. Rock Mass Thermal Expansion Coefficients for Longest Available Gage Lengths Near 
Heating Cycle Culmination 
MPBX 
Number 
Anchor 
Numbers 
Average . 
10-6/C 
Average 
Temperature (C) 
Gage Length 
(m) 
TMA-MPBX-1 1 to 4 5.88 160.3 2.84 
TMA-MPBX-3 2 to 6 4.14 70.07 4.0 
TMA-MPBX-2 2 to 5 2.36 116.6 3.4

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.2-24 September 2002 
Table 6.2.4.1-1. Chemistry Analysis of SHT Borehole 16-4 Waters with Reported In-Situ Waters from 
the General Area 
BH 16-4 SPC00521206 
Suite 1 
SPC00521245 
Suite 2 
SPC00521252 
Suite 3 
SPC00522238 
Suite 4 
Collection Date 11/25/96 * 02/04/97 02/27/97 05/22/97 
DCS Temp (C) NA 46.9 47.60 51.20 
LLNL LLNL LLNL LLNL 
Perched 
Water 
UZ-14 
PT-4 e 
SZ 
Groundwater 
J-13 f 
Pore 
Water 
UZ-5- 
TP-4 g 
Rainier 
Mesa 
Fracture 
Water g 
SZ 
Groundwater 
G-4 f 
Na (mg/L) 16 13.9 12.20 11.00 34.0 45.8 33 35 57 
Si (mg/L) 16.8 17.4 14.50 15.20 32.1 28.5 99 25 21 
Ca (mg/L) 13 9.76 8.65 7.70 27.0 13 58 8.4 13 
K (mg/L) 2.5 
2.69a 
2.5 3.30 2.30 1.8 5 9 4.7 2.1 
Mg (mg/L) 1.63 1.16 1.01 0.92 2.1 2.01 12 1.5 0.20 
pH 6.2 h 6.9 6.80 6.55 7.4 7.5 
HCO3 (mg/L) d 188 141.5 129 98 139 
F (mg/L) 0.44 0.12 <0.5 <0.50 2.18 0.25 2.5 
Cl (mg/L) 2.54 
2.1 b 
1.45 1.00 2.20 6.7 7.1 34 8.5 5.9 
S (mg/L) 0.71 0.20 0.21 
SO4
2 (mg/L) 1.83 
1.5 b 
0.42 <2 <2 14.1 18.4 39 15 19 
PO4
3 (mg/L) <0.03 <0.4 <2 <2 <10 
NO2
 (mg/L) <0.01 0.15 <2 <2 
NO3
 (mg/L) 1.1 <0.4 <2 <2 14.5 8.8 
Li (mg/L) <0.03 <0.03 <0.01 <0.01 0.048 
B (mg/L) 0.37 0.74 0.66 0.93 0.134 
Al (mg/L) <0.06 <0.06 <0.06 <0.06 0.0 0.02 
Fe (mg/L) 0.74 0.13 0.30 0.03 74 
Sr (mg/L) 0.2 
0.1850 a 
0.22 c 
0.14 0.12 0.11 0.04 559 
Rb (mg/L) 0.0066 a 
Br (mg/L) <0.02 
0.008 b 
<0.4 <2 <2 0.1 
. D 101.7 
95.00 a 
93.1 c 
99.6 
94.0 a 
98.2 100.6 97.3 98 103 
. 18O 12.9 
11.80 a 
13.1 c 
12.9 
13.1 a 
12.8 13.57 13.4 13 13.8 
Tritium 0.44 . 0.19 TU 
<0.3 TU b 
0.0 
87Sr/86Sr 0.71243 a 
0.71240 c 
U (mg/L) 1.013 x 101 c 
234U/238U 8.03200 c 
NOTE: * This column contains non-Q data as discussed in text. e Yang et al. 1996 [100194], p. 36, Table 6 
a LBNL data f Harrar et al. 1990 [100814], p. 5.5, Table 5.1 
b Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) data g Harrar et al. 1990 [100814], p. 6.5, Table 6.1 
c USGS data h See text for description of pH measurement. 
d derived from charge balance

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.2-25 September 2002 
Table 6.2.4.2-1. SHT Stellerite Abundance on Fractures, Pre-heating Drill Core ESF-TMA-MPBX-1 
Total number of fractures examined 75 
Number of fractures with stellerite 58 
Average percent coverage of fractures by stellerite 31% 
Drill hole characteristics: 7 m long, 0.5 dip toward bottom of hole (eastward) 
Core interval examined: 0 to 4.33 m, minus 0.49 m unrecovered or removed for thermal/mechanical 
measurements

ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.2-26 September 2002 
Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
Table 6.2.4.2-2. Summary Descriptions of SHT Natural-Fracture Mineral and Test-Product XRD Samples 
Sample 
Identifier 
Borehole Depth 
(ft) 
Description of sample 
LANL 3052, p1 1 2.3-2.4 Natural fracture coating. Centimeter-scale vapor-phase pocket with zeolite-cemented breccia. Sample is mostly 
zeolite, with some brecciated tuff. 
LANL 3054, p1 1 13.0-13.2 Natural fracture coating, .0.1 mm thick, of microcrystalline zeolite, deposited directly on smooth, planar cooling-joint 
surface. 
LANL 3006, p1 16 16.5-17.0 Test products, small white mounds on original borehole surface with minor bedrock impurities, orientation of sample 
unknown. 
LANL 3004, 
SSL08p1 
16 15.5-16.5 Post-test sample, outermost 0.5 mm of original borehole surface, orientation of sample site unknown. 
LANL 3003 16 12.0-12.1 Test products, cohesive brownish particulate layer peeled from bottom of original pre-heating borehole. 
LANL 3000, 
SSL02 
2 2.9-3.4 Test products, silica scale, maximum thickness 0.2 mm, on bottom of original borehole surface. Impurities of bedrock 
and brownish particulates. 
Table 6.2.4.2-3. Semiquantitative XRD Identification of SHT Natural-Fracture Minerals and Test Products 
Sample Identifier Borehole Depth (ft) Smectite Zeolite Amorphous Calcite Gypsum Feldspar Tridymite Cristobalite Quartz Hematite Other 
Natural Fracture Minerals 
LANL 3052, p1 1 2.3-2.4 minor major 
. . . minor . . major . . 
LANL 3054, p1 1 13.0-13.2 trace major 
. . . . . . . . . 
Test Products 
LANL 3006, p1 16 16.5-17.0 . minor major major minor minor . . trace . minor 
LANL 3004, 
SSL08p1 
16 15.5-16.5 minor minor . minor minor major . major major trace major Al 
metal 
LANL 3003 16 12.0-12.1 trace trace . minor . major minor major major . . 
LANL 3000, 
SSL02 
2 2.9-3.4 minor . minor minor . major minor major major minor minor 
mica 
NOTES: Approximate limits of semiquantitative descriptors, all in weight %: major = >20%, minor = <20%, trace = <1%, . = not detected. 
Stellerite. 
Identified on the basis of XRD and SEM-EDX as opal-A. 
Unidentified mineral, possibly a sulfate-bearing phase.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-1 September 2002 
6.3 DRIFT SCALE TEST (DST) 
The DST is the third and largest of several planned and conducted in situ thermal tests that 
investigate coupled processes in the local rock-mass surrounding the potential repository. These 
coupled processes are thermally driven by heat released from electrical heaters that simulate heat 
from emplaced nuclear waste. A block of rock, approximately 60 m wide, 50 m deep and 
50 m high, includes 9 floor/canister heaters in a 5 m diameter drift and 50 wing heaters installed 
in horizontal boreholes drilled perpendicular to the drift into the rock. Numerous sensors located 
in the DST block measure thermal-hydrological-mechanical-chemical (T-H-M-C) behavior. The 
heating of the DST began on December 3, 1997 and continued through January 14, 2002. The 
test is on-going for a planned cooling phase of 4 years. A detailed description of the DST is 
provided in the following two reports, the Drift Scale Test Design and Forecast Results 
(CRWMS M&O 1997 [146917]) and Drift Scale Test As-Built Report (CRWMS M&O 1998 
[111115]). 
DST Input-DTNs and related information such as Q-status and respective locations (figures, 
tables, and text) are tabulated in Table 4-3. DST Output-DTNs are tabulated in Table 6.3-1. 
The general layout and plan view of the Exploratory Studies Facility (ESF) Thermal Test Facility 
(TTF) and DST area are shown in Figures 6.2-1 and 6.3-1. 
The configuration for the DST, as shown in Figure 6.2-1, includes a declining Observation Drift 
driven mostly east in a downward slope. The breakout, near the intersection of the ESF North 
Ramp and main drift, is 2,827 m from the North Ramp portal. The downward slope of the 
Observation Drift ensures a minimum 10 m of Tptpmn rock (Tertiary-Miocene (Age), Paintbrush 
(Group), Topopah Spring Tuff (Formation), Crystal-Poor (Member), Middle Nonlithophysal 
(Zone)) overlying the DST drifts. The Tptpmn represents one of the three geologic units targeted 
to host the potential repository. At the elevation of the DST crown, the Connecting Drift breaks 
out to the north from the Observation Drift (see Figure 6.2-1). 
Figure 6.3-1 shows that the DST includes a 47.5 m long, 5 m diameter Heated Drift. The Heated 
Drift is complemented by an 11 m long entry from the Connecting Drift of similar diameter. 
Other components include plate loading and Data Collection System (DCS) niches. Figures 6.3-2 
through 6.3-8 provide three-dimensional perspectives of the thermal, mechanical, hydrological, 
and chemical boreholes. Since some boreholes contain multiple types of sensors, only the 
primary usage of the borehole was highlighted. The boreholes are color coded to identify the 
wing heaters and the primary processes (T-M-H-C) measured in each of the 147 boreholes. The 
DST borehole numbering system begins at 42 because the initial 41 boreholes correspond to the 
Single Heater Test (which is co-located in the TTF). 
The as-built locations of the 147 boreholes drilled into the DST block are listed in Table 6.3-2. 
All coordinates are based on a local right-hand coordinate system in which 0,0,0 is the center of 
the bulkhead on the cool side. The positive X, Y, Z-direction are generally northward (away 
from the Observation Drift), westward (away from the Connecting Drift), and upward, 
respectively. The last 12.5 meters of the Heated Drift (starting from Y = 35 m) is lined with 
concrete in order to evaluate the feasibility of concrete liner as ground support for waste 
emplacement drifts in the potential repository.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-2 September 2002 
The DST DCS recorded thermal, hydrological (partial), and mechanical data, for the most part, 
on an hourly basis. The acquired data consists of both original (measured electronic values) and 
converted (engineering units). Four packages of data were submitted to the Records Processing 
Center (RPC) and corresponding DTNs (LA9908FH6001WP.001 [158319], 
LA0111FH831151.002 [158317], LA0208FH831151.001 [159515], and LA0208FH831151.002 
[159308] were also obtained. These DCS-DTNs are considered non-qualified because they are 
stored in the RPC but they do identify CDs of identical qualified data that are distributed to the 
Thermal Test Team. These DCS-DTNs also identify Scientific Notebooks that provide details of 
measurements including calibration information. These DCS-DTNs are reviewed and restructured 
and periodically submitted to the TDMS resulting in many of the Input-DTNs 
introduced below and listed in Table 4-3. As discussed in Section 1 and the introduction to 
Section 6, these Input-DTNs are further refined, reduced, and restructured and then resubmitted 
to the TDMS as Output-DTNs (see Table 6.3-1). As mentioned in Section 6.1, the end user has 
access to three levels of data for DST thermal, hydrological (partial), mechanical measurements: 
DCS-DTNs, Input-DTNs, and Output-DTNs. For most future applications, it is anticipated that 
end users will access the Output-DTNs because they are more user friendly. 
6.3.1 DST Thermal Measurements 
The following sections present discussions on the power and temperature histories of the DST 
during the four-year heating phase. Discussion includes measurements of heater power and rockmass 
temperatures, as well as parameters derived from laboratory and field measurements. 
Detailed discussion of DST power and thermal measurements is provided in Sections 6.2 and 8 
of the Drift Scale Test Design and Forecast Results Report (CRWMS M&O 1997 [146917]), 
Sections 5.1.1, 6, and 9 of the Drift Scale Test As-Built Report (CRWMS M&O 1998 [111115]), 
and Sections 3 and 10.2 of the Ambient Characterization of the Drift Scale Test Block report 
(CRWMS M&O 1997 [101539]). The Input-DTNs and Output-DTN for DST power and thermal 
measurements are listed in Tables 4-3 and 6.3-1, respectively. 
6.3.1.1 Heater Power 
Heat was generated from 50 wing heaters and 9 floor (canister) heaters. These two types of 
electrical heaters had a combined power output of approximately 280 kW when operating at full 
capacity. The nine canister heaters were located in the center of the drift along a distance of 
approximately 47 m. The wing heaters were inserted in horizontal boreholes in the wall of the 
heated drift perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the heated drift. These wing heaters were 
evenly distributed on 1.83 m spacings in boreholes located on both walls of the heated drift. Each 
wing heater had 10 m of heated length evenly divided between inner and outer heating elements 
of 1.145 kW and 1.719 kW capacity, respectively. 
Each of the nine canister heaters in the Heated Drift had 60 heating elements in it, only 30 of 
which were switched on at any given time. (The other 30 elements were backups.) To estimate 
the power supplied to each canister, the current being supplied to all the heating elements in a 
given canister was summed and the result multiplied by the canister heater voltage. Note that for 
the first 20 days of the test, only 28 heating elements in canister #8 were active. A 29th heating 
element was activated on day 20 and the 30th heating element on day 40.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-3 September 2002 
The DST wing heater, canister heater, and total power data may be found in the following Input- 
DTNs: MO9807DSTSET01.000 [113644], MO9810DSTSET02.000 [113662], 
MO9906DSTSET03.000 [113673], MO0001SEPDSTPC.000 [153836], 
MO0007SEPDSTPC.001 [153707], MO0012SEPDSTPC.002 [153708], 
MO0107SEPDSTPC.003 [158321], and MO0202SEPDSTTV.001 [158320]. 
6.3.1.1.1 Results: Heater Power 
Because of the numerous DST power measurements, only representative discussion and graphics 
are provided. All DST power measurements and graphics can be accessed in the Output-DTNs 
identified in Table 6.3-1. 
Figure 6.3.1.1-1 shows the total power applied to the wing heaters and the canister heaters, as a 
function of time. For the first 800 days, average total power to the wing heaters is approximately 
135 kW, average total power to the canister heaters is approximately 52 kW, and average sum of 
the wing and canister power is approximately 186 kW. The voltage applied to the wing and 
canister heaters is also recorded. Average wing and canister heater voltages have been quite 
stable at approximately 212 and 189 volts, respectively. 
For the first 820 days of the test, the power was nearly constant, dropping, from an initial value 
of approximately 188 kW to approximately 178 kW. On March 3, 2000, the first of five 
intentional interim power reductions were implemented to maintain drift wall temperature near 
200oC (see temperature plot at drift crown in Figure 6.3.1.1-1). The fifth and final interim power 
reduction occurred on August 22, 2001. After these five interim reductions, the total power was 
approximately 140 kW, or approximately 75% of its initial level. On January 14, 2002, all 
heaters to the drift scale test were reduced to zero power. 
Of the 100 wing heater elements, 5 failed. Both elements of wing heater 29 failed after 185 days 
of heating, the outer element of wing heater 26 failed after 211 days of heating, the outer element 
of wing heater 9 failed after 412 days of heating, and the outer element of wing heater 16 failed 
after 622 days of heating. 
6.3.1.1.2 Measurement Uncertainty: Heater Power 
The accuracy of the watt transducers used in measuring the heater power is conservatively 
estimated to be within 2%. Refer to Section 6.1.1.1.2 for additional discussion of uncertainty 
related to heater power. 
6.3.1.2 Temperatures 
Temperatures of the rock in the DST were measured from approximately 1,950 resistivity 
temperature devices (RTDs). Temperatures elsewhere in the DST, including the Heated Drift, 
wing-heater boreholes, and MPBX boreholes, were measured with approximately 700 
thermocouples as described in the Drift Scale Test As-Built Report (CRWMS M&O 1998 
[111115]). Temperature boreholes in the DST were designed to ensure three-dimensional 
measurement of the thermal field. RTD sensors, which were used to measure rock-mass 
temperature, were bundled together with pre-determined spacing between sensor tips. The spatial 
density of sensors along an instrument borehole is higher in regions where greater thermal

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-4 September 2002 
gradients are expected. The spatial density is also higher in regions where transition between 
dryout and condensation is expected to develop during the tests. 
The range of temperatures in the DST depended on the location of the measurement and the 
duration of heating. The highest temperatures were encountered in the vicinity of the heat 
sources (i.e., wing heaters). In these regions, the range of temperature varied from ambient to 
about 300C. To properly cover the expected range of temperatures, sensors with the capability 
of measuring temperatures to at least 300C were used. RTDs and thermocouples are 
commercially available, can cover the expected temperature range, and are reliable for long-term 
monitoring. 
The heating-phase temperature data in the Output-DTN: for approximately 1,950 RTDs are 
organized into individual EXCEL workbook corresponding to each temperature borehole. Each 
workbook contains spreadsheets and charts. On one EXCEL spreadsheet, the data are organized 
with each RTD temperature history in each column in ten-day intervals for the duration of the 
heating phase. In general, there are approximately seventy RTDs for most of the temperature 
boreholes. Individual columns can be hidden or revealed for graphical display or usage. Another 
EXCEL spreadsheet in the workbook contains, for each temperature borehole, the coordinates 
for the respective temperature sensors. Two types of thermal graphs are developed in two 
separate charts. The first chart shows temperature history. The second chart shows temperature 
profiles as a function of a spatial coordinate at various times during the DST heating phase. 
These two types of graphics are intended to facilitate comparison with simulations for the 
validation of thermal-hydrological (TH) process models. 
The DST temperature data may be found in the following Input-DTNs: MO9807DSTSET01.000 
[113644], MO9810DSTSET02.000 [113662], MO9906DSTSET03.000 [113673], 
MO0001SEPDSTPC.000 [153836], MO0007SEPDSTPC.001 [153707], 
MO0012SEPDSTPC.002 [153708], MO0107SEPDSTPC.003 [158321], and 
MO0202SEPDSTTV.001 [158320]. 
6.3.1.2.1 Results: Temperatures 
Because of the numerous DST temperature measurements, only representative discussion and 
graphics are provided. All DST temperature measurements and graphics can be accessed in the 
Output-DTN identified in Table 6.3-1. 
Figure 6.3.1.1-1 presents the temperature response for a single thermocouple (TC-19) located 
near the center of the Heated Drift during the heating phase of the DST. The temperature 
response at the drift wall follows an expected response, in that temperatures initially rise rapidly 
in response to switching on the heaters over a period of approximately 50 days. As time passes, 
the temperatures rise gradually, then the rate of rise decreases and the temperatures tend to 
remain flat as a result of the five interim power reductions during the final two years of the 
heating phase. After all heaters are switched off, the drift surface temperature, including TC-19, 
decreases rapidly. 
Figure 6.3.1.2-1 illustrates the temperature distribution near the end of the heating phase along 
the periphery of the Heated Drift. The contours are constructed from thermocouples installed on

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-5 September 2002 
the drift walls at the drift crown (roof) and at the ribs (elevation of the wing heaters). As 
expected, temperatures are lower near both ends of the heated drift and higher at the mid-length 
of the Heated Drift. For a given Y along the Heated Drift, temperature is higher at the wingheater 
elevation (about 3.9 m from the drift crown). Boreholes 79 and 80 are parallel to the 
Heated Drift (Figure 6.3-3) and at an elevation of approximately 10 m from the centerline of the 
DST, above the horizontal boreholes that house the wing heaters. The temperature profiles for 
boreholes 79 and 80 are presented in Figures 6.3.1.2-2 and 6.3.1.2-3 respectively. These 
temperatures are higher over the central part of the DST and lower over the unheated portion (the 
11 m entry into the bulkhead of the Heated Drift). Also, note that the temperatures in borehole 79 
are somewhat higher than those in borehole 80. This is because the elevation of borehole 79 
could not be maintained during drilling because of its extreme length, causing it to be closer to 
the wing heaters than planned. 
There are two interesting thermal behaviors evident in borehole 79. The first is the tendency of 
the curves to flatten significantly at 96Cthe boiling point of water at this elevation. This 
phenomenon occurs because temperature rises pause temporally at the boiling point as the water 
in the rock vaporizes. 
The other interesting thermal signature evident in borehole 79 is the temperature behavior near 
Y = 13 m (Figure 6.3.1.2-2). At sub-boiling temperatures, the rock near this location was 
substantially warmer than the rock on either side of it. Near the boiling point, the temperature 
profile was essentially constant, and at temperatures exceeding the boiling point, the rock near 
this location was somewhat cooler than the surrounding rock. This may be explained by the 
existence of a vertical fracture near this location. When the rock temperature was below boiling 
(i.e., the rock still contained liquid water), steam generated below this location (closer to the 
heater) may have been rising along the fracture, elevating the temperature of the rock near the 
fracture to levels exceeding those of adjacent rocks. At boiling, everything was isothermal for a 
while as water in the rock evaporated. After all the water in the rock had boiled off, the 
temperature of most of the rock started to increase again. Near the fracture, however, the 
temperature remained somewhat cooler than that of the surrounding rock. It may be that a lot of 
water condensed in this region when the temperature was sub-boiling, and additional heat was 
required to evaporate that water when the temperature in the vicinity of the fracture first reached 
and then exceeded the boiling temperature. Alternatively, the anomalous cool temperature near 
the fracture could reflect cool moisture flowing downward in the fracture toward the heated 
region. 
The other thermal DST boreholes were drilled radially away from the heated drift centerline at a 
fixed Y station. Figures 6.3.1.2-4 through 6.3.1.2-7 present temperature histories and temperature 
profiles for boreholes 158 and 164, respectively. Borehole 158 is orientated vertically up in the 
crown of the heated drift near its midlength. Borehole 164 is a horizontal borehole that parallels 
the wing heater boreholes. The temperature distribution shows the boiling phenomenon 
discussed above, as well as comparatively high rock temperatures characteristic of rock-mass in 
close proximity to the wing heaters. 
Figures 6.3.1.2-8 and 6.3.1.2-9 provide temperature contours after four years of heating in two 
respective planes: a vertical slice through the mid-length of the heated drift and a vertical slice 
through the longitudinal axis of the heated drift. These contours approximately describe the

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-6 September 2002 
dryout zone, where temperatures exceed 96C, surrounding the heated drift. The dryout zone is 
estimated to be 24,000 cubic meters at the end of the four-year heating phase. Also shown are the 
areal extents of the temperature distributions in the DST block. The formation of these 
temperature contours from the Input-DTNs included the application of AutoCAD software that 
evaluated temperature and location data at specific time intervals. Using this data, fitted curves 
or temperature contours were constructed for each point in time. Additional contours in these 
three planes for years one, two, and three are provided in the DST temperature Output-DTN. 
6.3.1.2.2 Measurement Uncertainty: Temperatures 
The uncertainty in DST temperature measurements involved both RTDs and thermocouples. 
Generally in the DST, the RTDs measured rock and air temperatures and the thermocouples 
measured heater temperatures. 
The RTD was accurate within 0.3oC (Section 5.1 of Single Heater Test Status Report (CRWMS 
M&O 1997 [101540])). With consideration of other factors, such as the location of the RTDs, 
measured temperature in the DST was estimated to be accurate within 2.C. The RTD bundles 
were grouted in the boreholes; consistently some of the RTDs might not have had direct contact 
with the borehole wall. There might have been some time delay between the temperature 
variations in the rock and that measured by the RTDs. But it is believed that this time delay was 
small because the rock-mass was heated slowly. 
The thermocouple was accurate within 2.2oC (Section 5.1 of the Single Heater Test Status Report 
(CRWMS M&O 1997 [101540])). With consideration of other factors, such as the location of the 
RTDs, the accuracy of the measured temperature in the DST was estimated to be within 3.5.C. 
6.3.1.3 Laboratory Parameter: Thermal Conductivity 
Thermal conductivity measurements on core samples were performed using the Guarded Heat 
Flow Meter test method (Brodsky et al. 1997 [100653], pp. 11-14) and the Section 3 of Ambient 
Characterization of the Drift Scale Test Block (CRWMS M&O 1997 [101539]). The apparatus 
functioned by placing a specimen between two heater plates controlled at different temperatures, 
producing heat flow through the specimen. A heat-flux transducer (HFT) located between the 
specimen and one heater plate measured heat flow. Since this heat-flux transducer is in series 
with the specimen and between both heater plates, the resulting temperatures on each side of the 
specimen, along with knowledge of the specimen thickness, allowed the thermal conductivity of 
the specimen to be determined. 
Two series of tests were performed to measure thermal conductivity. In the first test series, 
samples recovered from the DST block were tested over the temperature range of 30.C to 300.C. 
The test specimens were placed between two heater plates controlled at different temperatures, 
and the heat flow was measured. Radial heat flow losses were minimized by using a cylindrical 
guard heater. Moisture contents were either air dry (as received), oven dry, vacuum saturated, or 
partially saturated (intermediate between air dry and vacuum saturated). The moisture contents 
of the specimens tested as received were not indicative of in situ conditions. Laboratory 
specimens were cored under water and dried out in storage. In a second series of tests, the 
relationship between thermal conductivity and saturation was determined (SNL 1998 [118788]).

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-7 September 2002 
Welded tuff was taken from Alcove 5 of the DST, and nonwelded tuffs from four 
lithostratigraphic units were obtained from three surface drillholes. Thermal conductivities were 
measured for six welded and six nonwelded specimens under dry, saturated, and approximately 
ten intermediate moisture conditions (SNL 1998 [118788]). All thermal conductivity tests were 
conducted at 30.C and at atmospheric pressure. 
The DST thermal conductivity data may be found in the following Input-DTNs: 
SNL22100196001.006 [158213] and SN0203L2210196.007 [158322]. 
6.3.1.3.1 Results: Thermal Conductivity 
A complete listing of DST thermal conductivity for different temperatures and saturation is 
provided in the Output-DTN identified in Table 6.3-1. A small subset is presented in Tables 
6.3.1.3-1 and 6.3.1.3-2. 
The thermal conductivity data over a range of temperatures from 30oC to 70oC are summarized 
in Table 6.3.1.3-1. Thermal conductivity values were relatively uniform throughout the sampling 
volume. The mean thermal conductivities and standard deviations about the mean are given at 
each temperature. No temperature dependence is observed. Thermal conductivities ranged from 
1.9 to 2.3 W/(m-K) with an average thermal conductivity of 2.1 . 0.1 W/(m-K) over this range 
of temperatures. 
The distribution of thermal conductivity results obtained at 30oC provide a visual indication of 
the central tendency of the data. No analysis was performed to determine the best-fit distribution 
curve. Results show that the individual specimens with thermal conductivities farther than one 
standard deviation from the mean did not cluster in particular locations. The highest thermal 
conductivity, 2.3 W/(m-K), was obtained for HDFR197.5-C, which is from either the lower 
portion of the Tptpmn or upper portion of the Tptpll unit. The mean thermal conductivity for 
each individual borehole was 2.1 W/(m-K). 
Results for the second series of tests in which thermal conductivities were determined for a range 
of saturation are illustrated in Table 6.3.1.3-2. A linear and commonly used nonlinear curve were 
fitted to the data and the goodness of fit determined. The linear relationship provides a better fit 
to the data, as indicated by the sum of the squared errors. 
6.3.1.3.2 Measurement Uncertainty: Thermal Conductivity 
The uncertainty in DST thermal conductivity is similar to that discussed for the SHT in Section 
6.2.1.3.2. 
6.3.1.4 Field Parameters (REKAThermal Conductivity and Thermal Diffusivity) 
A thermal probe was developed at the University of Nevada, Reno, to determine in situ thermal 
conductivity and thermal diffusivity. The probe is called rapid estimation of thermal 
conductivity (k) and thermal diffusivity (alpha), or REKA. REKA is a self-contained probe 
consisting of a heat source and 16 temperature sensors. During measurements, a small amount of 
heat, about 2 watts, was transferred to the rock, and temperature differences were measured. 
Assembled, a REKA probe is a rigid cylinder approximately 0.5 cm in diameter and about 60 cm

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-8 September 2002 
in length. The REKA probe was grouted in a borehole of approximately 1.2 cm in diameter. The 
borehole had to be sufficiently straight to allow probe insertion. 
For characterization during the pre-heating phase, five locations were selected based on the 
competency of the wall rock at this site, including minimal fracturing, sufficient separation from 
rock bolts, and similarity of density (as determined by drilling rate). All five locations chosen for 
analysis appear to have similar characteristics based on these criteria. The boreholes were drilled 
in random directions to average the effects of unseen physical phenomena (faulting, stress relief, 
etc.). Detailed discussion of the REKA measurements and methodology can be found in the 
following reports: Ambient Characterization of the DST Block (CRWMS M&O 1997 [101539], 
pp. 10-4  10-8) and Danko and Mousset-Jones (1993 [134360]). 
During the heating phase, measurements were made in boreholes 151, 152, and 153 (see 
Table 6.3-2). The REKAthermal conductivity and thermal diffusivity data during the heating 
phase may be found in the following Input-DTNs: LL980411004244.060 [159107], 
LL980411104244.061 [159111], LL980902104244.070 [159109], UN0106SPA013GD.003 
[159115], UN0106SPA013GD.004 [159116], UN0109SPA013GD.005 [159117], 
UN0112SPA013GD.006 [159118], UN0201SPA013GD.007 [159119]. 
6.3.1.4.1 Results: Field Thermal Conductivity and Thermal Diffusivity 
Results of thermal conductivity and thermal diffusivity measurements using the REKA probe 
during the pre-heating phase are taken from Section 10.2 of CRWMS M&O 1997 ([101539]) and 
presented in Table 6.3.1.4-1 and Table 6.3.1.4-2. These results are shown for corroborative 
purposes to compare with the laboratory measurements presented in the previous Section 6.3.1.3. 
Table 6.3.1.4-1 shows the REKA evaluation results assuming that the rock-mass temperature is 
only affected by the REKA probes heater during the 12-hour measurement period; therefore, no 
rock-mass background temperature correction was performed. Table 6.3.1.4-2 shows the REKA 
results assuming that the rock-mass temperature changes with time during the 12-hour 
measurement period because of both the REKA probes heater, and some other heating or 
cooling effect, such as a change in the ambient temperature. 
We note that the values of thermal conducting in Tables 6.3.1.4-1 and 6.3.1.4-2 fall within the 
same range as that observed in the laboratory measurement presented in 6.3.1.3. 
6.3.1.4.2 Measurement Uncertainty: Field Thermal Conductivity and Thermal 
Diffusivity 
The REKA probe assumes the rock will behave in a homogenous, isotropic manner, which may 
not be the case. Nonetheless, its application is valid, since more sophisticated measurement 
devices do not exist and historical correlation of predicted and measured temperatures, using in 
situ thermal properties, is good (CRWMS M&O 1997 [146917]). The temperature measurement 
for the REKA probes over the temperature range in the DST is estimated to be within 1oC. The 
drift of the thermocouple measurement will affect the accuracy of the calculated thermal 
conductivity and thermal diffusivity. The drift in the thermocouples was estimated to be less than 
1% of the temperature. REKA measurements pertain to a small volume, with an estimated radius 
of 0.1 m.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-9 September 2002 
6.3.2 DST Hydrological Measurements 
To assess the thermal-hydrologic processes in the DST, the spatial distribution and the temporal 
variations of the moisture content in the rock-mass were monitored. Electrical resistance 
tomography (ERT), ground penetrating radar (GPR), and neutron logging were used to monitor 
the moisture content. Air permeability was measured periodically to assess the changes in the 
fracture permeability during the test. Core samples collected from the DST region were tested in 
the laboratory for some hydrologic properties, such as porosity, density, and moisture retention 
curves, and electrical properties, such as resistivity and relative permittivity. These will be 
presented in the following corresponding sections. 
6.3.2.1 Electrical Resistance Tomography (ERT) 
This section describes ERT surveys made during the DST heating phase to map the changes in 
moisture content caused by heating. Of particular interest is the formation and movement of 
condensate within the fractured rock-mass. Figure 6.3-8 in Section 6.3 shows the location of the 
ERT boreholes in the DST. The ERT in the DST was conducted in four imaging planes: two 
vertical cross sections from the Observation Drift to the Heated Drift and two vertical planes 
along the axis of the Heated Drift. The two vertical cross sections from the Observation Drift to 
the Heated Drift are located at Y = 4.6 m, formed by boreholes 45 and 46, and at Y = 24.7 m, 
formed by boreholes 62 and 63. Borehole lengths are about 40 m. The two vertical planes along 
the axis of the Heated Drift include: one in the crown of the Heated Drift formed by boreholes 
135, 145, 166, and 176; and one in the invert of the Heated Drift formed by boreholes 136, 146, 
167, and 177. The two vertical planes along the axis of the Heated Drift cover a length of the 
drift from Y = 2.7 m to 39.3 m. The borehole lengths are about 20 m in the crown and about 16 
m in the invert. The electrode spacing in the DST ERT is about 1 m. The electrodes were grouted 
in the boreholes. 
Near the end of the heating phase, the vertical cross section image plane at Y = 24.7 m 
malfunctioned because of the increased contact impedance between the electrodes and the rock. 
Otherwise, the ERT has been functioned well. All of the DST ERT data can be found in the 
TDMS under the following Input-DTNs: LL000804023142.009 [158325], LL990702704244.099 
[113872], LL980808604244.065 [113791], LL980406404244.057 [113782], and 
LL980108804244.052 [158332]. 
6.3.2.1.1 Results: ERT 
The saturation estimates produced by data reduction model 2 (as presented in Section 6.1.2.1.1), 
which assumes that the primary pathway of the electrical current is through the double layer, are 
presented in here. As examples of the DST ERT results, Figures 6.3.2.1-1 and 6.3.2.1-2 show the 
resistivity image as measured on January 10, 2002, at of the end of the heating phase, and the 
saturation image produced from it, respectively. Images are presented as a ratio to the preheating 
baseline values. The vertical image planes along the longitudinal axis of the Heated Drift 
started at about 2.7 m from the bulkhead. The vertical cross section imaging plane intersects the 
Heated Drift at about 4.6 m from the bulkhead. These figures are examples of the ERT results in 
the DST. The rest of the ERT results can be found in the TDMS under the Input-DTNs listed 
above. As shown in Figure 6.3.2.1-2, the drying of rock started in regions near the heaters.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-10 September 2002 
Tomograms for the different vertical planes along the Heated Drift indicate that the end effect is 
apparent at the bulkhead at Y = 0, but not as obvious at the far end of the Heated Drift. Aside 
from the end effects, the drying along the Heated Drift was fairly uniform. Some localized 
increases of moisture were observed in regions both above and below the Heated Drift, but 
seemed to be more profound in the region below the Heated Drift. The vertical extent of the 
drying region near the wing heater seemed to be greater than that near the floor heaters in the 
Heated Drift. This was probably a result of the greater heating effects in the wing heater plane 
than in the Heated Drift. 
6.3.2.1.2 Measurement Uncertainty: ERT Saturation Changes 
There are many factors that could contribute to the uncertainty in the estimated saturation 
changes in the rock-mass by using ERT. The measurements of the voltage and current at the 
electrodes are fairly accurate. More importantly, saturation changes, estimated by ERT, are 
impacted by the following uncertainties: 
. The accuracy of the temperature maps in the vertical cross section imaging planes near 
the Observation Drift is limited by the sparse coverage of the temperature sensors. 
Errors in the extrapolated temperature maps will result in erroneous saturation 
estimates. 
. The other uncertainty factors that impact the ERT in general can be found in Section 
6.1.2.1.3. 
6.3.2.2 Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) 
The feasibility of the cross-hole radar profiling method to monitor the saturation changes due to 
thermal hydrological processes was proven for the Single Heater Test and discussed in Section 
6.2.2.2. The same data acquisition and data analysis method discussed in 6.2.2.2 were applied to 
the Drift Scale Test. Detailed discussion of the data acquisition and data processing specific to 
Drift Scale Test can also be found in three Level 4 Milestone reports (Peterson and Williams 
1998 [159128]; 1998 [159120]; Williams and Peterson 1998 [159121]). 
The radar data were acquired in ten boreholes (47-51, 64-68) as shown in Figure 6.3-6. These 
boreholes are collared from the Observation Drift and are the same boreholes used for neutron 
logging. These ten boreholes form two arrays of five boreholes each in two vertical planes. 
Cross-hole tomographic data were collected between adjacent borehole pairs using two 
acquisition modes: the Zero Offset Profile (ZOP) and Multiple Offset Profile (MOP) as 
discussed previously in Section 6.2.2.2. The severity of the borehole inclination in the well pairs 
47-48 and 64-65, however, limited the data acquired between these boreholes to ZOP data only. 
Full MOP data coverage, necessary for subsequent tomographic processing, could not be 
accomplished. Since these well pairs represent data coverage that is far enough away from the 
Heated Drift intersection that few thermally induced changes in the radar data were anticipated, 
the impact of data acquisition limitation is minimal. 
GPR data were acquired according to the schedule shown in Table 6.3.2.2-1.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-11 September 2002 
After acquisition of Phase 1, the borehole temperatures became so great that the cables used in 
the measurements melted. It took many months to redesign and manufacture cables that were 
more heat resistant for Phase 2. Furthermore, owing to the extreme heat encountered in borehole 
67 (due to its proximity to a wing heater), accurate measurements could no longer be taken. 
Hence, all data acquisition for well pairs involving this borehole (66-67 and 67-68) was halted 
after phase 5. However, because of the similarity in spatial positioning of the well pairs, the data 
acquired between well pairs 49-50 and 50-51 acted as sufficient proxy for the well pairs 67-68 
and 66-67. 
The primary data recorded are the radar waveforms. Data in the form of the transmitter and 
receiver stations, and the respective wave travel times, have been submitted to the TDMS 
periodically over the course of the experiment. The DTNs (referenced according to the phase 
numbersPRE (Pre-heating); P1 (Phase 1 of heating)) are listed as follows: 
LB990630123142.005 [129274] (PRE, P1, P2, P3), LB000121123142.004 [158338] (P4), 
LB000718123142.004 [153354] (P5), LB0101GPRDST01.001 [158346] (P6), 
LB0108GPRDST05.001 [158440] (P7), and LB0203GPRDSTEH.001 [158350] (P8, P9, P10). 
The XYZ coordinates of the transmitter and receiver positions were determined from the 
borehole collar and bottom as-built coordinates are in the Input-DTN: LB990630123142.005 
[129274]. 
6.3.2.2.1 Results: GPR 
To perform the travel-time inversion, a 40 m x 40 m field in each plane of boreholes was divided 
into a grid of 160 x 160 pixels producing a pixel dimension of 0.25 x 0.25 m, which corresponds 
to the antenna-station spacing of 0.25 meters. The multiplicity of source and receivers resulted in 
a dense sampling of the inter-borehole area; over 4,000 arrival times were available for each 
tomographic inversion. The inverted times produce the velocity fields for each of the 11 surveys 
(PRE, and P1 through P10). 
The velocity differences are highlighted by subtracting the travel time values between two 
successive surveys and inverting these differenced data. The P1 values are differenced from the 
PRE values, the P2 values are differenced from the P1 values, and so on, until P10 is differenced 
from the P9 travel times. Difference tomograms for the 51-50 and 50-49 well pairs are shown in 
Figure 6.3.2.2-1. The average absolute velocity value is about 0.1 m/ns, so a difference value of 
0.01 m/ns is about a 10% change in velocity. The scale of the graphs is from .0.008 m/ns, which 
is about an 8% change in velocity. The tomograms all show significant velocity increases and 
decreases. In general, radar velocities will decrease with temperature increase, and increase with 
water-content decrease. So an increase in velocity, as seen near the Heated Drift and the wing 
heaters, shows that the velocity increase resulting from the decrease in water content is greater 
than the velocity decrease resulting from the increase in temperature so near the heater. The 
amount of drying can also be observed as a ring around the heat source expanding with each 
survey. 
The derived tomograms are submitted as output associated with this report under Output-DTN: 
LB0208GPRDSTHP.001, as identified in Table 6.3-1.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-12 September 2002 
6.3.2.2.2 Measurement Uncertainty: GPR 
Data uncertainty associated with picking the travel times and inversion errors are as discussed in 
Section 6.2.2.2.2 for SHT. 
6.3.2.3 Neutron Logging 
Neutron logging is used to determine moisture content in rocks and soils. Neutron logging was 
conducted to monitor moisture content in boreholes 47-51, 64-68, and 79-80 (see Figure 6.3-6) 
during the DST. For the DST, a Teflon tube, with an RTD bundle mounted on its outside, was 
inserted into the boreholes 79 and 80, and grouted into place. In the other neutron boreholes (47- 
51 and 64-68) the Teflon tube was grouted in the boreholes, without the RTD. The Teflon tube 
permits easy insertion, placement, and removal of the tool. The neutron probe used for the preheating 
baseline measurements and the very early in-heat measurements of the DST was a 
Campbell Pacific Nuclear model 503DR, serial number H37067677, 3.81 cm (1.5 in.) diameter 
probe. Starting from February 1998, when a probe (Comprobe model 1905-07EF, serial number 
4751, 4.13 cm (1.625 in) diameter), designed for operating at temperatures up to 200.C, became 
available, it was used in the DST through the remainder of the DST heating phase. To evaluate 
the possible impact of changing tools, the baseline measurement in borehole 47 conducted on 
October 27, 1997, using the Campbell Pacific tool, was compared with the Comprobe 
measurement in the same borehole on February 17, 1998. As shown in Figure 6.3-6, borehole 47 
was one of the farthest neutron boreholes from the heaters. No moisture-content change was 
expected in this borehole at this early stage of the heating. A relationship of Comprobe count = 
0.11387 x CPN count was established to convert the Campbell Pacific counts to Comprobe 
counts. The DST neutron data can be found in the TDMS under the DTN: LL020710223142.024 
[159551]. 
6.3.2.3.1 Results: Neutron Logging 
A very small subset of the DST neutron results that reside at the TDMS are presented here. The 
neutron results are shown as the difference in fraction volume water content between the heating 
phase measurements and the pre-heating baselines. Therefore, in the following figures, a positive 
difference fraction volume water means gaining moisture content; and a negative difference 
fraction volume water means drying. To calculate water saturation, one can simply divide the 
fraction volume water content by the porosity. All of the neutron results were smoothed to 
remove some variations, but did not change their amplitudes much. 
As an example of the DST neutron logging results, Figure 6.3.2.3-1 shows the difference fraction 
volume water in borehole 66 as a function of depth from the collar during the heating phase. 
Borehole 66 extends from the Observation Drift to above the Heated Drift at about 26.5 m from 
the bulkhead. This borehole is near the crown of the Heated Drift, but not close to the wing 
heaters. Figure 6.3.2.3-1 shows four snapshots of the difference fraction volume water content at 
about one, two, three, and four years of heating. The water content was virtually not changed at 
the end of the first two years of heating. During the third year of heating, the drying was most 
significant, both in spatial extent and amount of moisture loss. During the fourth year of heating, 
the moisture content in the dry region did not change much, but the dry region extended 
significantly. This is consistent with the neutron logging in the LBT and SHT.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-13 September 2002 
Neutron logging results in the DST showed that the moisture content in boreholes 47, 48, 64, and 
65 did not change significantly during the four-year heating phase. The drying in a neutron 
borehole was a strong function of its distance to the heaters (either to the wing heaters or to the 
floor heaters in the Heated Drift. 
Figure 6.3.2.3-2 shows the relationship between volume water content and temperature based on 
neutron measurements from borehole 79 and 80. This plot shows that the water content in the 
rock remains nearly constant within 814% until temperatures near boiling are reached. 
Thereafter, significant reduction in water content occurs between 90.C and 105.C where it nears 
1%. Water content in the rock continues to decrease as it approaches zero at approximately 
150.C. Although some anomalously low volume water content is measured in the sub-boiling 
regime, most of the volume water content is reasonably consistent for the range of temperatures 
considered (25190.C). 
6.3.2.3.2 Measurement Uncertainty: Moisture Content Determined by Neutron Logging 
The neutron tool was calibrated to the liner-grout and liner-RTD bundle-grout systems as used in 
the DST borehole. However, variations in the grout volume along a borehole, possibly caused by 
changes in the borehole diameter, break-out regions, etc., will introduce uncertainty in the 
measured results. One particularly severe case was in borehole 80, where the pre-heating 
baseline measurements were conducted before grouting and after grouting. The baseline 
measurements showed that the deepest 6 m section of the borehole was not grouted. Calibration 
results without grout were used for reducing the data in the ungrouted section of the borehole. 
But the amount of grout in the region between the grouted and the ungrouted sections of the 
borehole (between 50 and 53 m from the collar) was unknown. Therefore, the moisture content 
in that portion of the borehole is associated with a greater degree of uncertainty. 
The other factors that contribute to measurement uncertainty associated with neutron logging are 
as discussed in Section 6.2.2.3.2. 
6.3.2.4 Active Pneumatic Testing and Passive Hydrological Monitoring Measurements 
Pre-Heating Air Injection 
Pre-heating characterization by air-permeability tests were performed in DST boreholes as they 
became available for testing. The pre-heating air-injection tests provide an estimate of the 
fracture permeability in the test block and establish baseline values for tracking changes arising 
from thermally driven coupled processes. Single-hole air-permeability tests were performed in 
November - December 1996, and in February - March 1997, in 14 boreholes (boreholes 45-48, 
51-53, 56-57, 69-70, 73, 75, and 78). Locations of these boreholes in the test block are shown in 
Figures 6.3-4, 6.3-6, 6.3-7, and 6.3-8. Pressure and flow data for these tests can be found in 
DTN: LB970600123142.001 [105589] and are documented in Tsang and Cook (1997 [100646]). 
In addition, 24 boreholes were tested in July 1997. These are boreholes 158167, 170174, and 
176177 (Figure 6.3-3) intended for temperature measurements, and several wing heater 
boreholes (boreholes 98100, 115118). Pressure and flow data for the July 1997 tests can be 
found in DTN: LB980120123142.005 [114134] and are documented in Tsang and Freifeld (1998 
[159097]).

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-14 September 2002 
Heating Phase Air Injection 
For each of the 12 hydrology boreholes (57-61, 74-78, and 185-186, as shown in Figure 6.3-4), a 
string of custom-designed high-temperature packers were installed to divide the 40 m long 
borehole typically into four isolated zones of approximately 8 m each. For boreholes 58 and 77, 
only a string of three packers could be installed because of obstruction caused by fallen rocks 
from the fractures and lithophysal cavities. After installation of the pneumatic packer strings in 
the baseline, air-permeability measurements were performed in the 46 isolated intervals. Air was 
injected at a constant flow rate in a zone isolated either by two packers or by a packer and the 
bottom of borehole, while the pressure responses in this and all other packed-off zones were 
monitored. The air-injection pressure and flow data from the hydrology boreholes prior to 
initiation of heating can be found in DTN: LB980120123142.004 [105590] and are documented 
in Tsang and Freifeld (1998 [105774]). After the collection of the initial DST pre-heating airinjection 
data, the entire process of selecting injection intervals was automated, using computercontrolled 
gas delivery manifolds installed near the collars of each cluster of boreholes. The new 
combination of hardware and software makes the entire process of air-permeability measurement 
fully automated, allowing for more consistent collection of data with minimum need for on-site 
field personnel to oversee the testing. Detailed information on the setup of the air-injection 
equipment can be found in Freifeld and Tsang (1998 [159098]). 
The DST active hydrologic testing program consists of periodic (approximately quarterly) airinjection 
tests conducted in these same 46 isolated intervals in the 12 hydrology boreholes. These 
tests are to monitor the changes in the fracture permeability as a result of coupled processes. 
Periodic air-injection test data containing measured pressures and flow rates collected during the 
heating have been submitted to the TDMS under the following DTNs: LB980420123142.002 
[113706], LB981016123142.002 [129245], LB990630123142.001 [129247], 
LB000121123142.002 [158337], LB000718123142.002 [158341], LB0101AIRKDST1.001 
[158345], LB0108AIRKDST5.001 [158438], and LB0203AIRKDSTE.001 [158348]. 
Passive Hydrological Monitoring Data of Pressure,Temperature, and Humidity 
In addition to active air-injection tests, passive monitoring of pressure, temperature and humidity 
is being conducted on an hourly basis by the Data Collection System (DCS). Locations (XYZ 
coordinates) of these sensors can be found in the DTN: MO0002ABBLSLDS.000 [147304]. 
Because of the slow rate of change for these parameters, the data is parsed to 4 points per day by 
the DCS manager. This reduced data set is then reviewed and submitted in three data reports, 
containing time-stamped pressure, temperature, and humidity data. Each file contains a 
sequential list of data for all 46 monitored locations within the DST hydrology boreholes. 
Passive monitoring data for the heating phase of the DST can be found under eight Input-DTNs: 
LB980420123142.001 [113696], LB980715123142.001 [113733], LB981016123142.001 
[158353], LB990630123142.002 [158355], LB000121123142.001 [158335], 
LB000718123142.001 [158340], LB0101H2ODST01.001 [158347], LB0108H2ODST05.001 
[158441], and LB0203H2ODSTEH.001 [158351]. The Output-DTN is as listed in Table 6.3-1.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-15 September 2002 
Gas Tracer Tests 
Tracer tests were performed in boreholes 75 and 76 to estimate fracture porosity in the test block. 
The gas tracer data can be found in DTN: LB980420123142.002 [113706]. Estimated fracture 
porosity from the gas tracer data can be found in DTN: LB980912332245.002 [105593]. 
Detailed discussion of testing are presented in Freifeld and Tsang (1998 [159098]). 
Tracer tests were performed with the hardware and software used for performing DST quarterly 
air-injection tests, with additional hardware to perform the mixing of a tracer gas into the airinjection 
stream and to control and analyze gas withdrawn from an extraction interval. A 
Quadrupole Mass Spectrometer Gas Analyzer was set up in the field to perform in real time the 
quantitative analysis of tracer gas concentration. 
6.3.2.4.1 Results: Active Pneumatic Testing and Passive Hydrological Monitoring 
Pre-Heating Air Injection 
Steady-state analysis of the data was performed using Equation 5.1-1. Estimated permeability 
values from pre-heating characterizations conducted in November-December 1996 and 
February-March 1997 are shown in Table 6.3.2.4-1. Estimated permeability values for the 24 
boreholes tested in July 1997 are shown in Table 6.3.2.4-2. Estimated pre-heating baseline 
permeabilities for the 46 isolated intervals tested in November 1997 are shown in 
Table 6.3.2.4-3. 
Heating Phase Air Injection 
The air-injection test data collected during the heating phase that was submitted to the TDMS 
contained measured pressures and flow rates only. Pressure data appeared as absolute pressure. 
To estimate permeability for the injection interval, the pressure values measured prior to the start 
of the injection, and the steady-state value obtained late in the injection period, are used in 
Equation 5.1-1. An example analysis of an air-injection test is illustrated by the pressure and 
flow data for an injection in borehole 185-2, as shown in Figure 6.3.2.4-1. Note that the near zero 
flowrate at the end of this injection test was set to zero for Figures 6.3.2.4-1, 6.3.2.4-5, and 
6.3.2.4-6. This particular test can be found in DTN LB000718123142.002 [158341]. Data needed 
to apply Equation 5.2-1 included the borehole zone length (8.54 m), obtained from Table 6.3.2.4- 
3, along with the steady-state pressure change (20.5 kPa) and injection flow rate (100 SLPM) as 
shown in Figure 6.3.2.4-1. The estimated permeability using these values is 1.64 . 10-13 m2. 
Throughout the heating phase, changes in permeability as a ratio to baseline permeability 
estimates could be used to indicate changes in fracture liquid saturation. These are shown in 
Figures 6.3.2.4-2, 6.3.2.4-3, and 6.3.2.4-4 for boreholes 57-61, 74-78, and 185-186, respectively. 
Permeability ratio as a function of time through the heating phase for the packed-off zones in the 
hydrology boreholes as shown in these Figures are the content of the Output-DTN 
LB0208AIRKDSTH.001. 
Changes in the borehole 185-2 permeability can be used to demonstrate the use of these figures 
in interpreting changes in fracture saturation throughout the DST. As shown in Figure 6.3.2.4-4, 
the borehole 185-2 permeability gradually declined from its baseline value. This decrease in air

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-16 September 2002 
permeability indicates a gradual build-up in fracture liquid saturation during the heating phase of 
the DST. 
As heating of the test block continued, many air-injection tests showed responses that were 
considered anomalous. Most of the unusual behavior was attributable to two-phase processes, 
such as vapor condensation or evaporation. An example of an anomalous response to an air 
injection is shown in Figure 6.3.2.4-5, for air injection in borehole 60-3. The odd-shaped 
response was attributed to the injection of cool dry air into a saturated hot environment. In these 
cases, the data cannot be used for the estimation of formation permeability, because no 
meaningful steady-state values are obtained. 
Another type of anomalous response is shown in Figure 6.3.2.4-6, an air injection into 78-4. In 
this test, borehole zones 78-1, 78-2, and 78-3 all show decreases in pressure. This is counterintuitive, 
since mass is being added to the system and pressure should increase. However, the 
observed pressure declines are the result of cold gas being transported in the 78-4 injection tube 
which needs to go through the sealed-off packer intervals 78-1, 78-2, and 78-3. This cooling can 
lead to condensation of vapor in these zones and thereby reduces pressure during the injection 
test. 
The failure of some of the pneumatic packers as heating progresses is another factor affecting 
analysis of the DST air-injection tests. Because a deflated packer changes the injection interval 
length, the data collected from the zones before and after the packer deflates were not amenable 
to comparison with the baseline data. Hence, the estimated permeabilities for zones next to 
deflated packers were not amenable to comparison with baseline permeability values. The 
deflated packers and dates that they became deflated are shown in Table 6.3.2.4-4. 
Passive hydrological monitoring data of pressure, temperature, and humidity 
For this report, the passively monitored hydrology data for the heating phase from December 
1997 through January 14, 2002, were assembled by appending the data files from each data 
submittal together and collecting a subsample of data points. These are submitted as output to 
this Scientific Analysis Report under Output-DTN LB0208H2ODSTHP.001. As an example, 
Figure 6.3.2.4-7 shows the temperature data for the sensors located in borehole 75. 
Gas Tracer Tests 
Three convergent weak-dipole flow field tracer tests were performed between boreholes 75 and 
76 in the DST. Air with a sulfur hexafluoride tracer was injected into borehole 76, and gas was 
withdrawn from borehole 75 for analysis. Gas tracer tests in the DST area were conducted in 
borehole 75 and 76, zones 2 and 4. Two different-strength dipoles were used in zone 2, 10:1 and 
30:1. A 10:1 dipole was used to test zone 4. The strength of the dipole refers to the ratio of 
withdrawal gas flux to injected gas flux. The flow rates for each test and the borehole geometries 
are listed in Table 6.3.2.4-5. 
The injection air and withdrawal gas flow rates and zone pressures were monitored prior to the 
injection of any tracer to ensure that a steady-state flow field was achieved. After a steady-state 
pressure field was obtained, the air-injection flow rate was reduced to 0.90 of the original value. 
A make-up gas stream of tracer equal to 0.10 of the original injection air stream was added from

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-17 September 2002 
a 10,000 PPM cylinder of SF6. The final injection gas stream had a concentration of 1,000 PPM 
SF6. After a limited injection period, the injection of tracer was halted, and the injection air 
stream was returned to its original flux rate. Throughout the entire duration of the experiment, 
the withdrawal gas stream was maintained at a steady flux rate, and SF6 concentration 
measurements were performed by the mass spectrometer every 30 seconds. Figure 6.3.2.4-8 
shows the mass breakthrough curve for one weak-dipole tracer test, as well as the cumulative 
mass recovery. Estimates for porosity using the plug-flow analysis procedure outlined in Section 
5.3 are given in Table 6.3.2.4-6. 
6.3.2.4.2 Measurement Uncertainty: Active Pneumatic Testing and Passive 
Hydrological Monitoring Measurements 
Since the same type of measurements were performed for the SHT, readers are referred to the 
discussion for the SHT in Section 6.2.2.4.2. Measurement uncertainty in analysis has been 
considered. For example, although the estimate of air permeability may not be as accurate as 
desired because of the assumptions involved, restricting the use of only the ratio of permeability 
to its respective pre-heating value, while keeping all other experimental parameters identical 
throughout the test, minimizes the impact of measurement uncertainty. 
6.3.2.5 Laboratory Hydrological Parameters 
Laboratory test results of saturation, porosity, bulk density, particle density, and gravimetric 
water content were conducted for both dry drilled cores and wet drilled cores from the DST 
block at Alcove 5 of the ESF. The measurements were carried out according to the Technical 
Implementation Procedure (TIP) YMP-LBNL-TIP/AFT 2.0 identical to those described in 
Section 6.2.2.5. Data can be found on TDMS under DTN: LB970500123142.003 [131500]. 
Similar to that discussed in Section 6.2.2.5 for the SHT, moisture retention curves were 
measured at elevated temperatures to about 94.C for samples taken from the DST block. In 
preparation for the moisture retention measurements, the dry bulk density, saturated bulk density 
and porosity for these samples were determined. The moisture retention curves and the related 
densities and porosity data measurements have been documented in Lin et al. (2002 [159099]). 
In addition to the above, electrical resistivity and relative permittivity were also measured as a 
function of water saturation at 35, 50, 70, and 95C, over a range of frequency from 10-2 to 106 
Hz. These properties are useful for the processing of geophysical imaging data. The 
measurements were made using either a HP4274A LCR meter, a HP4284A LCR meter, or a 
Solartron 1260 frequency response analyzer. Measurements made over a range of frequencies 
verify measurements made at a single frequency and provide additional information about 
conduction mechanisms and microstructural parameters. The electrical property data can be 
found in the TDMS under DTNs: LL981109904242.072 [118959] and LL020502523142.020 
[159105]. Reporting can be found in Section 11.1 of the Drift Scale Test As-Built Report 
(CRWMS M&O 1998 [111115]).

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-18 September 2002 
6.3.2.5.1 Results: Laboratory Hydrological Parameters 
Saturation, Porosity, Density, and Gravimetric Water Content 
The data from two sets of core measurements are tabulated in Table 6.3.2.5-1 for the dry-drilled 
cores and in Table 6.3.2.5-2 for the wet-drilled cores from the DST area. Summaries of the 
averages and standard deviations of the measured values are presented at the end of each table to 
facilitate comparison between different data sets. The first data set in Table 6.3.2.5-1 are based 
on the cores from boreholes 182, 183 and 184 dry drilled from an elevated platform at the end of 
the Connecting Drift across from the DST block. Included in the second set in Table 6.3.2.5-2 
are wet-drilled cores from boreholes 52, 53, 56, and 81 within the DST block. 
The data in Tables 6.3.2.5-1 and 6.3.2.5-2 indicate that the liquid saturation of the wet-drilled 
cores can differ from that of the dry drilled cores by 10%. The discrepancy is in part a result of 
the different drilling methods and may in part arise from spatial heterogeneity. There are obvious 
differences from the cores from the dry-drilled cores away from the Heated Drift in Table 
6.3.2.5-1 and wet-drilled cores near the Heated Drift in Table 6.3.2.5-2. The two most notable 
differences between the two batches are (1) the samples are less fractured or crumbled in the dry 
drilled cores, and (2) the core surfaces and core containers of dry-drilled cores are relatively 
drier. The statistics of the two batches suggest that the competent rocks have more uniform 
properties and less spatial variability or heterogeneity. Less competent rocks have more 
heterogeneous variations, containing porous packets interlaced with highly fractured rock blocks. 
The average saturation value compiled from all surface-based boreholes for Topopah Spring 
crystal-poor middle nonlithophysal tuff (266 samples) is 85 . 12% (Flint 1996 [100673]). Here, 
the average value for the dry-drilled cores is 84%, and that for the wet-drilled cores is 93%. The 
corresponding surface-based borehole porosity value is 11 . 2%, as compared to the average 
values from 11% for dry cores to 13% for wet cores. Therefore, the 10% difference in liquid 
saturation between the dry-drilled and the wet-drilled data sets in the thermal test area is within 
the standard deviation of 12% for all the surface-based samples. 
Moisture Retention Curves 
Identical to the procedures discussed in Section 6.2.2.5, moisture retention curves were measured 
for core samples taken from boreholes 52 (CHE-1), 53 (CHE-2), 56 (CHE-5), 69 (CHE-6), 70 
(CHE-7), and 73 (CHE-10), whose locations are shown in Figure 6.3-6. In preparation for the 
moisture-retention measurements, hydrological properties were measured. 
Moisture-retention curves of the DST samples were performed at temperatures of 25.1C, 
49.6C, and 93.7C. Similar to the SHT data (Section 6.2.2.5), there is very little hysteresis 
observed between the wetting and drying curves at all temperatures. The temperature cycle has a 
very small effect on moisture retention: the post-temperature-cycle room-temperature data show 
a slightly smaller moisture retention than the initial room-temperature data. 
The DST samples show less moisture retention than the SHT samples (Section 6.2.2.5) at all 
temperatures. However, they show greater moisture retention than that of USW G-4 (Roberts and 
Lin 1995 [159100]; 1995 [159048]) and the Fran Ridge samples (Section 6.1.2.5). The data of

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-19 September 2002 
the DST samples are at the high end of the results of the USW H-1 samples (Section 6.1.2.5). 
The data of the DST samples are at the lower bound of that shown by Flint (1998 [100033]). 
Electrical Resistivity and Relative Permittivity 
Resistivity measurements are reported for one frequency, 1 kHz, because this frequency was 
determined to be free of electrode contamination (contact impedance) and represents the 
electrical properties of the material. Relative permittivity measurements are reported at 1 MHz, 
the highest frequency in the measurements. Samples were prepared from cores obtained from 
chemistry boreholes 69, 70, and 73 of the DST (Figure 6.3-6). Samples with obvious large 
cavities and inhomogeneous inclusions were avoided. Prior to the electrical property 
measurement, hydrological properties were obtained. Table 6.3.2.5-3 shows the sample ID, 
borehole, depth, wet and dry densities, and properties of the samples used. The samples are diskshaped, 
with a diameter to thickness aspect ratio of 10:1 (dime shaped). The diameter of the 
samples is ~5.1 cm. All samples were prepared with the bedding direction perpendicular to the 
direction of measurement. 
Electrical measurements began on samples that were dry. Water from well J-13 was added to the 
samples in small amounts and allowed to distribute throughout the sample. The length of time for 
this to occur was typically 3 to 4 hours, as verified by examining the resistivity of a sample as a 
function of time. Saturations were determined by weighing the samples immediately after 
electrical measurements were completed. Each sample was placed in a custom built holder made 
of Lucite or Lexan and separated from the atmosphere by an o-ring seal. Despite these 
precautions, water was sometimes lost from samples when measurements at relatively high 
saturations were attempted at high temperatures. The holders were placed in a standard oven and 
allowed time to equilibrate to the temperature (typically overnight). Upon reaching maximum 
saturation, the drying portion of the measurements began. The maximum saturation achieved was 
between 95% and 100%. Some samples were damaged (chipping and cracking) because of the 
cooling and heating, and the handling. Those samples were reshaped when necessary and the 
holders modified to accept the new shape. Samples were no longer used when indicators, such as 
noise in the data or mechanical flaws, demonstrated that the electrical-properties measurements 
were unreliable. 
Figure 6.3.2.5-1 shows the electrical resistivity of the DST samples as a function of water 
saturation in the drying cycle at 50.C. This is just one example to illustrate the variation of 
electrical resistivity with water saturation. The rest of the resistivity data can be found in the 
TDMS. The characteristics of the variation of resistivity with water saturation at other 
temperatures are similar. This type of resistivity saturation dependence is similar to that observed 
for other tuff samples. For all temperatures, the dry resistivity is between 107 and 108 .m and 
drops rapidly to between approximately 3,000 and 1,000 .m (depending on temperature) as 
saturation increases. This is interpreted as an indication that the adsorption of water and surface 
conduction dominates this region of saturation. At approximately 30% saturation, there is a 
change in the slope of log s versus saturation. Between 30% and 100% saturation, the resistivity 
decreases by only  to one order of magnitude.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-20 September 2002 
A small amount of hysteresis is observed between wetting and drying cycles. There are small 
increases in resistivity during the wetting phase, similar to previous measurements utilizing 
distilled water as the saturating fluid (Roberts and Lin 1997 [101710]). 
Figure 6.3.2.5-2 shows the relative permittivity of the DST samples as a function of water 
saturation in the drying cycle at 50C. This example illustrates the variation of the relative 
permittivity with water saturation. The rest of the permittivity data can be found in the TDMS 
under the DTNs listed above. At low saturations, permittivity is insensitive to temperature. The 
dry samples all have a dielectric constant (relative permittivity) between five and six. The nearsaturated 
samples have a range of values between 22 and 26. This range of relative permittivity 
values at one temperature is fairly typical above approximately 40% saturation for all 
temperatures. The scatter in the data increases as temperature increases and is particularly bad 
for the 70C wetting cycle above approximately 60% saturation. It is not known why this run 
shows this scatter. One possible explanation is that capacitance measurement noise at the highest 
frequencies of measurement (up to 1 MHz) increases with temperature. 
6.3.2.5.2 Measurement Uncertainty: Laboratory Hydrological Parameters 
Saturaton, Porosity, Density and Gravimetric Water Content 
The main source of error for saturation measurement is in the estimate of the weight of water 
condensed in the walls of the core container. This is evaluated by absorbing the water from the 
container with a paper cloth and weighing the cloth. When large amounts of fragments and 
powder are observed on the surfaces of the container, this measurement overestimates the water 
loss because it includes the weight of fine solids. Although the reason for this physically 
meaningless value of saturation over 100% is understood, there is no clearly better measurement 
to arrive at a more accurate value. In Tables 6.3.2.5-1 and 6.3.2.5-2, observations of factors that 
may potentially affect the results are included in footnotes. This soft information forms the 
basis for distinguishing cores that yield reliable weight measurements from cores that give 
potentially abnormal and inaccurate measurement. For example, the footnote concerning the 
crumbled core with two open fractures, a crushed zone and a porous, calcitic-like intrusion, for 
the particular data point with saturation over 100%, from borehole 81 in Table 6.3.2.5-2, gives 
reason to question the validity of this high value. 
Discussions in Section 6.3.2.5.1 also indicate that the liquid saturation of the wet-drilled cores 
can differ from that of the dry-drilled cores by 1-%. The difference can be attributed in part to 
different drilling methods and in part to spatial heterogeneity. 
Moisture Retention Curves 
Readers are referred to Section 6.2.2.5.2 for a discussion of the measurement accuracy and data 
uncertainty in moisture-retention measurements. 
Electrical Properties 
The accuracy of the instruments for the electrical property measurement was very high, usually 
better than 5% at the highest impedance limits (>100 M.). Each instrument was checked using a 
set of 1% tolerance resistors and capacitors. The instruments were found to yield consistent

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-21 September 2002 
results. Sample variations, as can be seen on the data, are greater than the instrument error. There 
were some uncertainties in the water saturation level during the measurement, especially at 
elevated temperatures and high saturation levels. Anisotropy in the electrical properties was not 
assessed for the DST samples. During the measurements, the path of the electric current was 
perpendicular to the bedding plane of the rock, which was not well established. Obvious 
heterogeneity in the test samples was avoided. The heterogeneity may cause great variation in 
electrical properties. 
6.3.2.6 Heat and Mass Flow through the Bulkhead 
The following discussion involves in-depth and unplanned investigations of heat and mass flow 
through the DST bulkhead. The subject matter was discussed in a white paper entitled Heat and 
Mass Flow Through the Bulkhead in the Drift Scale Test (Pannell 2001 [159514]). The white 
paper satisfied an agreement (TEF 2.1) reached between DOE and NRC at the January 2001 
Technical Exchange on Thermal Effects on Flow. The discussion in that white paper covers both 
measurements and modeling. A brief summary pertaining to only the measurement aspect will be 
presented here. These measurements were conducted for informative and complementary 
purposes and were never intended to be a requisite for the understanding of heat and mass loss 
through the bulkhead. 
The bulkhead separating the hot side of the Heated Drift from the unheated section is not 
perfectly sealed because bundles of power cable and instrument-wiring pass through the 
bulkhead (CRWMS M&O 1998 [111115], pp. 8-2 and 8-5). The unsealed bulkhead acting as an 
open boundary for unmonitored heat and mass flow introduces an artifact in the test. 
The issue of heat and mass loss through the DST bulkhead has been ongoing since the design of 
the DST, a design in which the primary purpose of the bulkhead was to act as a thermal barrier 
(CRWMS M&O 1996 [101375], pp. 3-17 and 3-18) that includes safety considerations. Preheating 
numerical simulations of the DST resulted in concerns about unmonitored heat and mass 
loss through the thermal bulkhead (Buscheck and Nitao 1995 [100657]). Recommendations 
included isolating the DST Heated Drift from direct pneumatic interference with the ESF tunnel 
system. This precaution was in itself problematic, since safety concerns would develop if the 
pressure within the DST heated drift were allowed to increase. 
On December 3, 1997, the heating of the DST was initiated. Within 40 days of the start of 
heating, moisture started to flow out of the bulkhead, as evidenced by condensation on various 
surfaces on the cool side of the bulkhead. This behavior was consistent with the heating of a 
large volume of rock that is highly fractured and approximately 90% saturated. As water in the 
rock boiled and turned to steam, the vapor moved under pressure gradient into cooler rocks, as 
well as into the Heated Drift and through the bulkhead. Also, the observed wetting on the cool 
side of the bulkhead alternated with drier conditions, with the latter coinciding with low relative 
humidity readings in the Heated Drift. Upon investigation, it appeared that barometric pumping 
was the cause for the intermittent wetting. Gas-phase flow from the rock to the Heated Drift is 
driven by pressure gradient. Superimposed on the positive pressure gradient from the rock to the 
Heated Drift is the barometric pressure fluctuations. Therefore, as barometric pressure decreased, 
more vapor flowed from the rock into the Heated Drift and out the permeable bulkhead, 
increasing the relative humidity in the Heated Drift. Conversely, as the barometric pressure

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-22 September 2002 
increased, less vapor flowed from the rock into the Heated Drift and the relative humidity 
decreased. Indeed, the relative humidity measurements in the Heated Drift vary inversely with 
the barometric pressure. 
Between July 1998 and May 1999, several measurements of conductive and convective heat loss 
through the bulkhead were performed (CRWMS M&O 1998 [159512], p. 3-1; 1999 [154585]; 
1999 [159513]). A summary listing of field efforts to address the issue of mass and heat loss 
through the bulkhead is provided below: 
(1) Determination of conductive heat flux by applying a heat-flux meter to seven 
locations on the bulkhead (five measurement locations were steel and two were glass) 
(2) Estimation of convective heat loss by considering how much water vapor was 
removed from a small-diameter pipe in the bulkhead during a 60-minute sampling 
period 
(3) Attempt to utilize the relative humidity data in the cool side of the bulkhead from the 
Moisture Monitoring Program to estimate the moisture loss from the DST. However, 
the operational ventilation flow rates (between 50 and 150 million liters per hour) 
imposed just outside of the Heated Drift were too large to allow a direct measurement 
of changes in the monitored humidity data. 
As mentioned above, these measurements were conducted for informative and complementary 
purposes. For example, these measurements provided much insight into the difficulty of 
obtaining useful measurements of conductive and convective losses. Problems with obtaining an 
accurate measurement of conductive losses as attempted in item (1) involved the irregular and 
multiple-material surface of the bulkhead. Complications with measuring convective heat losses 
in items (2) and (3) mainly stemmed from the intrinsic difficulty of measuring a highly 
heterogeneous moisture and heat flux from a diffuse source. Also, considerable uncertainty was 
involved in item (2) because it was not possible to reasonably estimate the fraction of moisture 
loss captured in the measurement system as a result of the inherent leakage through bundles of 
power cables and instrument-wiring pathways. 
After the white paper, which references measurements (1) and (2) above, was prepared, the 
thermal test team initiated a final field experiment to determine whether a heat and mass 
measurement was feasible. The basic approach involves measuring the temperature and the 
relative humidity, on the cool side of the Heated Drift, as a function of time and discrete spatial 
locations. Then the integral moisture increase in the drift volume on the cool side of the bulkhead 
was used to estimate the mass loss from DST convective heat flow. This measurement is 
nontrivial because of the substantial ventilation on the cool side of the bulkhead and the 
limitations of relative humidity measuring devices. In the July 2001 scoping study, the measured 
temperature and relative humidity in 38 installed Rotronic HygroClip relative humidity 
temperature sensors were used to estimate the changes in vapor mass and energy. The 
preliminary estimates of heat loss (for nonrepresentative conditions because the airflow from 
the ventilation system was necessarily reduced) yielded a total heat loss of ~ 0.5 to 2.6 kW. This 
is at least one order of magnitude less than what was expected from the numerical modeling of

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-23 September 2002 
the DST. This final experiment demonstrated that the vapor loss through the bulkhead of the 
Heated Drift was too complex to measure directly. 
6.3.3 DST Mechanical Measurements 
The discussion of mechanical measurements for the Drift Scale Test has been divided into 
several subsections based on the type of measurement: 
. Multi-point borehole extensometer (MPBX) displacement data 
. Cross-drift extensometers (CDEX, or pogo-sticks) 
. Strains measured on the inner surface of the cast-in-place liner 
. Acoustic emission 
. Laboratory parameters such as elastic modulus, Poissons ratio, and thermal expansion 
for intact rock and concrete 
. Plate loading test 
. Additional measurements, including rock scaling and acoustic emissions 
Detailed discussion of the mechanical measurements is documented in Section 6.3 in the Drift 
Scale Test Design and Forecast Results Report (CRWMS M&O 1997 [146917]), in Section 
5.1.2 of the Drift Scale Test As-Built Report (CRWMS M&O 1998 [111115]), and in Sections 4 
and 8 of the Ambient Characterization of the Drift Scale Test Block report (CRWMS M&O 1997 
[101539]). Input-DTNs and Output-DTNs for DST mechanical measurements are listed in 
Tables 4-3 and 6.3-1, respectively. 
6.3.3.1 Multi-Point Borehole Extensometers (MPBX) 
Figure 6.3.3.1-1 shows the layout of the MPBX boreholes. The as-built location coordinates of 
the collars and anchors are provided in Table 6.3-2. Displacements reported in this document 
followed the convention of extension being positive. Displacements were measured within the 
rock-mass surrounding the Heated Drift and between the Heated Drift and the Observation Drift. 
These measurements were used to evaluate numerical models related to T-H-M coupling as well 
as to provide data for determination of rock-mass thermal expansion. Multi-point borehole 
extensometers (MPBXs) were installed in 17 boreholes both within and outside the Heated Drift 
to monitor rock-mass movement during the DST. 
Two of the MPBXs (designated ESF-HD-81-MPBX1 and ESF-HD-82-MPBX2, with 81 and 82 
referring to the borehole numbers) were installed in two long horizontal boreholes drilled parallel 
to the Heated Drift from the connecting drift. Twelve MPBXs (MPBX3 through MPBX14) were 
installed in three four-borehole arrays (numbers 147-150, 154-157, and 178-181) drilled into the 
surrounding rock-mass from within the Heated Drift itself. The array containing MPBXs 3, 4, 5, 
and 6 (boreholes 147-150) is located in the Heated Drift at Y = 13.7 m; the array with MPBXs 7, 
8, 9, and 10 (boreholes 154-157) is located at Y = 21.0 m; and the array with MPBXs 11, 12, 13,

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-24 September 2002 
and 14 (boreholes 178-181) is located at Y = 41.1 m, in the concrete liner test section of the 
Heated Drift. For the three MPBXs in each array collared in the crown of the drift, the four 
anchors for each were located nominally at 1, 2, 4, and 15 m from the collar. For the fourth 
MPBX in each array, which was collared at the top of the invert, the anchors were installed so as 
to put them in the same relative position in the surrounding rock-mass as the other MPBXs (i.e., 
approximately 2.2, 3.2, 5.2, and 16.2 m from the collar). 
The remaining three borehole MPBXs were drilled for sequential drift mine-by monitoring. 
These MPBXs were installed in November-December 1996 in boreholes 42, 43, and 44, drilled 
slightly downward from the Observation Drift toward the Heated Drift. Boreholes 42, 43, and 44 
are located at Heated Drift stations 0+13.7, 0+20.8, and 0+32.2 m, respectively (each station 
refers to the Y-axis distance from the heated drift bulkhead). Refer to Section 5.2 for discussion 
related to the approach used to smooth the MPBX measurements. 
The displacement data may be found in the following Input-DTNs: SNF39012298002.002 
[159114], SN0203F3912298.033 [158361], SNF39012298002.010 [158367], 
SN0001F3912298.014 [153841], SN0007F3912298.018 [158374], SN0101F3912298.024 
[158400], SN0107F3912298.029 [158408], and SNF39012298002.006 [158419]. The 
displacement data corrected for thermal expansion may be found in the following Input-DTNs: 
SNF39012298002.012 [153840], SNF39012298002.008 [153839], SN0203F3912298.035 
[158363], SN0001F3912298.016 [153842], SN0007F3912298.020 [158388], 
SN0101F3912298.026 [158402], SN0107F3912298.031 [158413], SNF39012298002.004 
[153837]. 
6.3.3.1.1 Results: MPBX Displacements 
Because of the abundance of DST MPBX displacements, only representative discussion and 
graphics are provided. All MPBX displacement data and graphics can be accessed in the Output- 
DTN identified in Table 6.3-1. 
The following discussion provides a cross section of MPBX measurements of displacements 
within the DST block. The displacement plots have been smoothed by the procedure discussed 
above, with each plot representing the maximum (or minimum) over a 10-day period. 
MPBX1 is located in borehole 81, which runs parallel to and is collared outside the Heated Drift. 
This borehole is on the north side of the drift (the anchor is located in the Data Acquisition 
System niche). A time-history plot of smoothed, temperature-corrected displacement is shown in 
Figure 6.3.3.3-2. The overall performance of this MPBX1 is very good; there is very little noise, 
and the data for the heating phase of the DST show thermomechanical responses consistent with 
elastic model predictions. Some of the temperature data indicate the possibility of steam fronts or 
fracture flow paths in the borehole; the sharp temperature rise at 400 days for TC-6 is a primary 
example. There is very little indication of potential fracture slippage in the displacement data 
from this borehole. 
MPBX7 is located at Y = 21.0 m in borehole 154 anchored in the crown of the Heated Drift, and 
angled 30 from the vertical towards the north (away from the Observation Drift). A time-history 
plot of smoothed, temperature-corrected displacement is shown in Figure 6.3.3.1-3. The overall

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-25 September 2002 
quality of the data from MPBX7 is good, although the data are very noisy because of the 
temperature oscillations from moisture recirculation. The level and frequency of noise make this 
data useable only for evaluating general thermomechanical behavior, and not determination of 
specific events. Two interesting observations may be made about the displacement data: (1) the 
displacement at anchor 3 is much less than might be expected from elastic analyses; and (2) the 
displacements shown for anchors 1 (1 m from the collar) and 4 (15 m from the collar) are much 
closer to each other than would have been expected. 
MPBX8 is located at Y = 21.0 m in borehole 155, anchored in the crown of the Heated Drift, and 
angled 30 from the vertical towards the south (towards the Observation Drift). A time-history 
plot of smoothed, temperature-corrected displacement is shown in Figure 6.3.3.1-4. The overall 
quality of the displacement data from MPBX 8 is good. The biggest disappointment for this 
borehole was the loss of its TC-1, which required using the corresponding TC-1 from MPBX9 
for the reference temperature. (MPBX9 is vertically up, whereas MPBX7 is located at the mirror 
position opposite MPBX8. The thermocouple from MPBX9 was originally chosen because its 
data were cleaner than MPBX7, and the typical values were about the same.) There are two 
sources of moisture-induced noise: (1) temperature fluctuations in borehole 155 (days 300-500), 
for which the displacement data reflect real thermal-mechanical response; and (2) at later times 
(after day 800), fluctuations of MPBX9-TC-1, which introduce artificial noise into the 
conversion and thermal correction of MPBX8 data. Some evidence of moisture-related 
temperature oscillation is seen at other TCs for MPBX8. A large temperature perturbation event 
for all the TCs at days 475-545 (3/23/1999-6/1/1999) is similar in nature and timing to 
temperature events for MPBX9, as well as farthest sections of MPBX12 and 13, located 20 m 
further down the drift. This event may indicate connectivity between these four boreholes. The 
LVDT for Anchor 3 apparently failed on day 1247 (5/2/2001). 
MPBX9 is located at Y=21.0 m in borehole 156 anchored in the crown of the Heated Drift, and 
angled vertically upward. A time-history plot of smoothed, temperature-corrected displacement 
is shown in Figure 6.3.3.1-5. The displacement data from anchors 2, 3, and 4 of MPBX9 are 
good. The displacement data from anchor 3 level off unexpectedly (that is, when compared with 
an elastic model) at around 500 days. The biggest surprise is the onset of large-scale moistureinduced 
temperature perturbations, which eventually affect all the TCs except those already near 
boiling. MPBX10 is located at Y=21.0 m, anchored in the top of the invert of the Heated Drift, 
and angled vertically downward. A time-history plot of smoothed, temperature-corrected 
displacement is shown in Figure 6.3.3.1-6. The displacement data for MPBX10 are anomalous 
for all the anchors: anchor 1 failed early in the test; anchor 2 is erratic for the first year, then 
looks good for the remainder of the test; anchor 3 is erratic throughout the entire test; and anchor 
4 has regions of good data interspersed with large-sale noise that is not moisture-induced 
(because the TCs are clean throughout the test). Because of the erratic nature of the MPBX10 
data, it is hard to identify any events that may be related to microseismic phenomena. 
6.3.3.1.2 Measurement Uncertainty: MPBX Displacements 
The uncertainty of the DST MPBX measurements are similar to comparable SHT MPBX 
measurements, as discussed in Section 6.2.3.1.2. as shown in Table 6.3.3.1-1, the gauge range 
and accuracy of the LVATs for the MPBXs are . 25.4 mm and 0.5% respectively.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-26 September 2002 
6.3.3.2 Cross-Drift Extensometers 
Two cross-drift extensometers (CDEXs) were installed in the section of the Heated Drift with a 
cast-in-place concrete liner to measure cross-drift convergence. Often referred to as pogosticks, 
these convergence meters CDEX-1 and CDEX-2 were located nominally at 
approximately Y=42.3m, between the eighth and ninth canister heaters. CDEX-1 measures 
vertical closure, and it is anchored in the top of the invert of the Heated Drift and to the crown of 
the liner. CDEX-2 measures horizontal closure and is anchored to the liner on each rib. As for 
the MPBXs, displacements from the CDEXs reported in this document follow the convention of 
extension being positive. 
The cross-drift extensometer data may be found in the following Input-DTNs: 
SNF39012298002.002 [159114], SN0203F3912298.033 [158361], SNF39012298002.010 
[158367], SN0001F3912298.014 [153841], SN0007F3912298.018 [158374], 
SN0101F3912298.024 [158400], SN0107F3912298.029 [158408], and SNF39012298002.006 
[158419]. The cross-drift extensometer data corrected for thermal expansion may be found in the 
following Input-DTNs: SNF39012298002.012 [153840], SNF39012298002.008 [153839], 
SN0203F3912298.035 [158363], SN0001F3912298.016 [153842], SN0007F3912298.020 
[158388], SN0101F3912298.026 [158402], SN0107F3912298.031 [158413], 
SNF39012298002.004 [153837]. 
6.3.3.2.1 Results: Cross-Drift Extensometers 
The thermocouple and anchor locations, as well as the quality of the data from CDEX-1 and 
CDEX-2, are listed in Table 6.3.3.2-1; a time-history plot of smoothed, temperature-corrected 
displacement is shown in Figure 6.3.3.2-1. In general, ovalization takes place during the heating 
phase in which horizontal closure and vertical extension occurs. This deformation reflects 
increasing horizontal stresses as temperatures increase during the heating phase. Vertical stresses 
tend to remain constant during heating, since in an elastic regime their magnitudes are limited by 
the overburden. 
6.3.3.2.2 Measurement Uncertainty: Cross-Drift Extensometers 
There are several potential sources for measurement uncertainty in the displacement 
measurements presented in Section 6.3.3.1.2 and 6.2.3.1.2 for the MPBXs. Much of that same 
discussion pertains as well to the CDEXs. The only exception to that discussion would be any 
effects caused by being inside a borehole, which obviously the CDEXs are not. The gage range 
and accuracy of CDEX-related instrumentation are presented in Table 6.3.3-6 in Section 6.3.3.1. 
6.3.3.3 Strains 
Strain gages were installed on the surface of the cast-in-place (CIP) concrete sections located at 
the west end of the Heated Drift to monitor the concrete behavior during heating and cooling of 
the DST. A total of 45 four-inch-long Karma foil resistive strain gages were installed in fifteen 
rosettes (three gages per rosette) in a circumferential-axial-45 pattern at three Y stations. The 
five strain gage rosettes at each station were located at the crown, to the left and right above the 
springline, and to the left and right near the concrete invert; this layout is shown in Figure 
6.3.3.3-1. The rosette strain gages are designated by rosette number and orientation (AXL=axial,

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-27 September 2002 
CIR=circumferential, DIA=diagonal); for example, ESF-HD-RSG-5-AXL is the axial strain gage 
for rosette number 5. In addition to the 45 strain gages (15 rosettes) bonded to the CIP liner, 
there were five additional strain gages bonded to concrete and 304 stainless steel coupons 
placed near Canister Heater 8 in the Heated Drift. These coupons are prisms of concrete and 
steel that are used to provide baseline data on the strain-gage response and some indication of 
unconstrained concrete material response. Gage and anchor locations (as-builts) for strain-gage 
measurements made for the DST are presented in DTN: SNF38040197001.001 [159130]. Refer 
to Section 5.2 regarding the approach used to smooth the strain measurements. 
The strain data may be found in the following Input-DTNs: SN0203F3912298.034 [158362], 
SNF39012298002.011 [158368], SNF39012298002.007 [158365], SN0001F3912298.015 
[158372], SN0007F3912298.019 [158387], SN0101F3912298.025 [158401], 
SN0107F3912298.030 [158409], SNF39012298002.003 [158417]. The strain data corrected for 
thermal expansion may be found in the following Input-DTNs: SN0203F3912298.036 [158364], 
SNF39012298002.009 [158366], SNF39012298002.013 [158369], SN0001F3912298.017 
[158373], SN0007F3912298.021 [158391], SN0101F3912298.027 [158407], 
SN0107F3912298.032 [158414], SNF39012298002.005 [158418]. 
6.3.3.3.1 Results: Strains 
Because of the abundance of DST strain data, only representative discussion and graphics are 
provided. All strain data and graphics can be accessed in the Output-DTN identified in Table 
6.3-1. 
Figure 6.3.3.3-2 shows a time history plot of the strains measured by the axial, circumferential, 
and diagonal strain gages on the liner surface, respectively. The strain gages placed on the 
concrete liner and on unconstrained concrete samples (not shown here) in the Heated Drift 
indicate the combined effects of thermal expansion, dehydration-induced shrinkage, and 
mechanical stress imposed by the interaction of the concrete with the heated rock surrounding 
the drift. The results from the strain gages on the unconstrained samples exhibit behavior 
indicative of drying shrinkage caused by dehydration, a phenomenon seen elsewhere in 
engineering literature. 
The circumferential, or hoop, strains begin as compressive strains, as the surrounding rock 
expands inward and compresses the liner. The axial and diagonal strains are nearly always in 
extension, because there is far less interference with thermal expansion of the liner in the axial 
direction. All of the strain gages on the liner surface went into extension by approximately day 
325 on account of combined thermal and mechanical effects. A mechanical component of the 
strain can be estimated by subtracting the strains measured from the unconstrained coupons (the 
thermal component) from the total strains. The mechanical component of the circumferential 
strain gages on the liner consistently shows that the crown of the liner is in compression, while 
the rest of the liner experiences smaller magnitudes of compression and tension. Note in the 
strain plots the beginning of the creep degradation of the epoxy beginning at around 950 days. 
Thermal expansion coefficients for T>96C have been estimated for the unconstrained concrete 
coupons that lay on the floor of the Heated Drift. The coupons reveal some very interesting 
information regarding the thermal expansion of concrete at elevated temperatures. The data seem

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-28 September 2002 
to reveal four distinct temperature regimes, each with its own characteristics for the thermal 
expansion coefficient .. 
1. T<100C, fast temperature rise : 812 ../C 
2. T<100C, slow temperature rise : ~0 due to coincident drying shrinkage 
3. 100C<T<165C : 1014 ../C 
4. T>165C: 3137 ../C 
This behavior is within the same range as to the laboratory thermal expansion data for SHT and 
DST intact rock samples (SNL 1997 [117471]). When the strain for each coupon is plotted as a 
function of temperature, the coupons all exhibit a precipitous change in slope (i.e., thermal 
expansion) at about 165C. In another interesting development, hysteresis in the strain data can 
be observed when temperature drops due to power outages. These data may be very important to 
the repository designers should concrete liners once again become part of the design plan. 
6.3.3.3.2 Measurement Uncertainty: Strains 
The following list includes all the known sources of measurement uncertainty for the strain data: 
Quantifiable 
. The accuracy of the instrumentation itself. The gage range and accuracy of strain gagerelated 
instrumentation are presented in Table 6.3.3.3-1. 
. The conversion of the electrical output to engineering units. The uncertainty from these 
equations, and the computational (round-off) error inherent in the DCS data conversion 
software, are negligible. 
Non-quantifiable 
. Electrical interference, such as spurious signals from power surges, can cause lowmagnitude 
noise, unexplained meandering in the data, or high-magnitude spikes. 
. Problems caused by elevated temperature leading to epoxy degradation. 
6.3.3.4 Acoustic Emission 
Passive seismic monitoring was used to monitor changes in acoustic emission (AE) activity and 
wave propagation characteristics. Microseismic events can be attributed to cracking of the rock 
or movement along pre-existing fractures or joints from thermal expansion. The methods, 
concepts, and instrumentation that were developed and tested in the early 1980 at the Climax 
Stock spent fuel test (Majer and McEvilly 1985 [159101]) were closely followed here for the 
DST. The microseismic monitoring measurements were governed by the Technical 
Implementing Procedure YMP-LBNL-TIP/TT 4.0, Rev. 1 Mod. 0). Detailed discussions of 
experimental set-up and data processing can be found in three level 4 milestones (Peterson and 
Williams 1998 [159102]; Williams et al. 1998 [159104]; Williams and Peterson 1998 [159121]).

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-29 September 2002 
Sixteen accelerometers were placed in DST boreholes 138-140, 142-144, 159-161, 163-165, 171, 
172, 174, and 175 (see Table 6.3-2). There were two different types of sensors depending on 
maximum temperature rating: Wilcoxin Research Model 793-6 (rated to 150.C) and Model 728- 
T (rated to 125.C). These were selected based on anticipated temperatures from pre-heating 
modeling. All ratings are at least 20.C higher than the maximum temperature anticipated. The 
sensors were connected to the Data Collection Shed by high-temperature (Teflon) coaxial wire 
so that sensor measurements could be recorded. The desired bandwidth was in the 1,000 to 
10,000 Hz range. The numbering, location, serial number, and model number of the sixteen 
accelerometer are listed in Table 6.3.3.4-1. Data recording the microseismic activity in the test 
block have been submitted to the TDMS periodically over the course of the heating phase under 
the following Input-DTNs: LB980120123142.007 [158352] (for background measurements), 
LB980420123142.004 [113717] (for time period 01/1998 to 04/1998), LB990630123142.004 
[158360] (for time period 04/1998 to 06/1999), LB000121123142.005 [158339] (for time period 
06/1999 to 01/2000), LB000718123142.005 [158343] (for time period 01/2000 to 07/2000), 
LB0101ACEMDST1.001 [158344] (for time period 07/2000 to 01/2001), and 
LB0108ACEMDST5.001 [158437] (for time period 01/2001 to 08/2001). 
6.3.3.4.1 Results: Acoustic Emissions 
Although the monitoring system was designed to operate continuously over the duration of the 
experiment, numerous problems occurred. Because of high-voltage noise spikes conducted along 
the accelerometer coaxial connections, the acquisition system initially was plagued by false 
triggering memory buffer errors. Efforts to reduce these problems were finally completed by 
December 1998, a full year after initiation of the heating phase. Enhancements to the recording 
system (bandpass filters) resulted in greatly improved data quality (i.e., increased signal/noise) 
starting in late December 1998. From this period until late October 2000, the system recorded 
microseismic events at a roughly uniform rate. After October 2000, however, a period of very 
low activity followed. Although deterioration in accelerometer sensitivities (resulting from 
thermal exposure, corrosive, fluids, etc.) may be one potential cause for the decrease in recorded 
activity, the system was judged to be operating properly during this time, according to the 
accelerometer and recording system check procedures detailed in YMP-LBNL-TIP/TT 4.0, Rev. 
1, Mod. 0. A histogram of microseismic events with time are shown in Figure 6.3.3.4-1. 
The data recorded in the seismic monitoring consist of the microseismic waveform and the time 
and date that it was recorded. To determine the location of the source of energy causing the 
seismic event, the data were processed as follows. The first-arrival times were picked by 
determining when the initial burst of energy arrived at each of the 16 monitoring station. After 
the first-arrivals times are picked, the location of the seismic energy source can be estimated by 
inversion. Figure 6.3.3.4-2 shows the locations of all the seismic events (collapsed to the yz 
plane) through the heating phase. The data in the TDMS contain the following: 
EVENT#: Represents the sequential order in which the acoustic emission/microseismic 
event was recorded by the recording system 
DATE: Represents the date on which the event was recorded 
TIME: Represents the time when the event was recorded

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-30 September 2002 
X(M): Represents the X coordinate for the located event 
Y(M): Represents the Y coordinate for the located event 
Z(M): Represents the Z coordinate for the located event 
OTIME(MS): Represents the origin or zero time or first-arrival time of the event by the 
recording system 
ERROR: Root Mean Square (RMS) error in travel time 
AMPLITUDE: Represents the amplitude of the recorded event 
An initial comparison between MPBX displacements and acoustic emissions was based on the 
time period of 12/21/1998 to 6/1/1999. A total of 76 AE events and 60 MPBX events were 
identified for comparison. Events were then eliminated due to lack of temporal or spatial 
correlation with other events. After all of this, only one pair of events was identified as a 
potential event captured by both AE and MPBX. The AE event identified in Table 6.3.3.4-2 
produced perhaps the strongest signal of any event registered by the AE equipment. Although the 
two data points correlate reasonably well, this alone is not proof that they correlate to the same 
mechanical event. Furthermore, since only one correlation was found, there is little evidence to 
support the possibility that the MPBX and AE data would indeed register the same event. 
Usually, one of two conditions was met to indicate that an AE event did not correspond with an 
MPBX event. The first condition was to have an AE event that was reasonably close to either a 
specific MPBX borehole or close to the plane in which an array of MPBX boreholes was located. 
For these events, although a spatial correlation was possible, there were no MPBX events from 
those boreholes within a reasonable time (i.e., less than 24 hours) after the AE event. Secondly, 
an AE event might have occurred at the same time as an MPBX event, but the two events were 
so far apart spatially, and without any corroborating events in locations between them, that they 
were considered to be unrelated. 
Eventually, AE data collected through 3/21/2000 (296 AE data points) were available for 
comparison with MPBX data. The only potential correlation is between a series of microseismic 
events on 7/1/1999 and 7/2/1999 (days 574575) and several discontinuities in SDM-MPBX3. 
Because of the small number of potential matches, and the nature of the two types of 
measurements, this comparison of AE and MPBX events did not yield any significant findings 
that showed a correlation between these data. 
After the rock scaling events were first noticed in late summer 2001, more recent AE data were 
evaluated to determine if any correlations exist between these events. The following conclusions 
were drawn from this latest comparison: 
. There is no apparent temporal correlation between AE data and rockfall events. 
. AE data indicates several significant pops in the drift crown at earlier times, which 
may or may not indicate the stress relief that caused the rockfall.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-31 September 2002 
. Rock spalling itself probably does not generate enough signal to register in AE data; the 
signal is weak, and the high local temperatures degrade the signal. 
6.3.3.4.2 Measurement Uncertainty: Acoustic Emissions 
Hammer blows to the wall of the Observation Drift are periodically recorded during the 
experiment. These data are included with transmittals to the TDMS and represent the primary 
means by which system repeatability and, in a sense, measurement error is assessed. Because the 
hammer blows always occur at the same location along the Observation Drift wall, the postprocessing 
of the hammer event should result in the proper spatial locating of this event. 
However, given the greatly elevated accuracy of locating events within the array of 
accelerometers, the hammer blows are not an ideal means of measurement error assessment: the 
hammer blow occurred outside of the array. Therefore, comparing the location of the hammer 
blow events over time should result in consistent locations within some reasonable error 
envelope. The acceptable envelope was determined to be a 2 x 2 x 2-meter region. The actual 
microseismic events should have a much higher degree of accuracy because they fall within the 
array boundaries. Post-processing of the microseismic events also results in the determination of 
a RMS error in the seismic-wave travel times. This error may be used to assess the accuracy of 
the resulting microseismic event location. 
6.3.3.5 Laboratory Mechanical Parameters 
Several pre-heating laboratory investigations were done to gather intact rock mechanical and 
thermomechanical properties/parameters of the TSw2 middle nonlithophysal tuff in the DST 
area, and to assess the concrete used in the invert and liner in the Heated Drift. This section 
describes the results of the following four suites of laboratory testing of parameters. 
. Thermal expansion of intact rock (Input-DTN: SN0203L2210196.007 [158322]) 
. Elastic constants and strength properties of intact rock (Input-DTN: 
SNL02100196001.001 [158420]) 
. Elastic constants and strength properties of concrete samples (Input-DTN: 
SNL23030598001.001 [158370]) 
. Creep testing of cast-in-place concrete (Input-DTN: SNL23030598001.003 [158422]). 
Detailed discussions of rock parameters are presented in Section 4 of the Ambient 
Characterization of the Drift Scale Test Block (CRWMS M&O 1997 [101539]). 
6.3.3.5.1 Results: Thermal Expansion 
The mean coefficients of thermal expansion (MCTEs) are summarized in Tables 6.3.3.5-1 and 
6.3.3.5-2 for heating and cooling, respectively, during the first thermal cycle. The mean MCTEs 
and standard deviations about the mean are given at each temperature for each borehole. 
Summary data for the entire test suite are given with standard deviations and 95% confidence 
limits at the bottom of each table. The data obtained during the first heating cycle show similar 
behavior for most MCTEs. With the exception of three, most specimens show steep increases in 
MCTE, beginning at approximately 200.C and continuing until approximately 300.C. This steep 
increase is attributed to phase changes in the silica mineral phases because of the presence of

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-32 September 2002 
cristobolite and tridymite. The increase in MCTE at elevated temperatures is not attributed to 
thermally induced fracturing or differential expansion, since these behaviors would not be 
significant during the second heating phase. The test data indicates sharp increases for both sets 
of heating/cooling cycles. The decrease in MCTE at 300.C suggests that the phase changes have 
been completed. Also, hystereses are linked with phase changes. The three specimens showed 
behavior different from the remainder of the suite partly because of different concentrations of 
cristobolite and tridymite. These minerals vary substantially from their respective mean values 
for two of the three samples that exhibited anomalous behavior. Two of these specimens 
(MPBX2-85.0-B and MPBX1-40.4) appeared to initiate phase changes below 200.C, and one 
specimen (HDFR1-97.9-B) appeared to undergo essentially no phase change. 
6.3.3.5.2 Results: Elastic Constants and Strength Parameters of DST Intact Rock 
The experimental data for the 16 specimens tested in unconfined compression are summarized in 
Table 6.3.3.5-1. Mean values, standard deviations, and 95% confidence limits are given in Table 
6.3.3.5-1 for Youngs modulus, Poissons ratio, unconfined compressive strength, and axial 
strain at peak stress. One specimen, MPBX1-1.0-A (test UCDST001), was unloaded after force 
began to drop at approximately 53 MPa. The specimen was later reloaded (test UCDST017) to a 
peak stress of 179 MPa. Data from the first loading of this specimen were used to calculate the 
mean elastic moduli to be consistent with the other tests. Data from the second loading were used 
in calculations of mean unconfined compressive strength and mean axial strain at peak stress. 
Youngs modulus ranged from 28.9 GPa to 43.1 GPa, with a mean value of 36.8 GPa. The 
standard deviation was  3.5 Gpa, and the 95% confidence limit was  1.7 GPa. The high 
Youngs modulus value (43.1 GPa) corresponds to the first loading of MPBX1-1.0-A. Because 
this specimen was unloaded at a low stress difference, the modulus was calculated over a lower 
stress range than for the other specimens. 
Poissons ratio ranged from 0.17 to 0.34, with a mean value of 0.20. The standard deviation was 
 0.04, and the 95% confidence limit was  0.02. The three specimens with the highest Poissons 
ratios were the only specimens that had pre-existing open fractures. 
Strengths ranged from 71 MPa to 324 MPa, with a mean value of 176 MPa. The standard 
deviation was  66 Mpa, and the 95% confidence limit was  32 MPa. The highest and lowest 
strengths were obtained on specimens from MPBX2 that were in relatively close proximity (4 m 
apart). Neither specimen had notable surface features that might indicate anomalous behavior. 
No analyses were performed to determine the best-fitting distribution curves for Youngs 
modulus, Poissons ratio, or unconfined compressive strength. 
6.3.3.5.3 Results: Elastic Constants and Strength Properties of Cast-in-Place Concrete 
Samples 
Six concrete specimens were tested to failure in unconfined compression, and four specimens 
were cycled to approximately 40% of the failure strength. Mean values and standard deviations 
of unconfined compressive strength, Youngs modulus, and Poissons ratio are given in 
Tables 6.3.3.5-2 and 6.3.3.5-3 for reinforced and nonreinforced concretes, respectively. Separate 
Poissons ratio values are given for the two (0 and 90) radial gages. Average failure strengths

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-33 September 2002 
were 56.6  3.2 MPa for reinforced concrete and 54.3  13.8 MPa for nonreinforced concrete. 
When an outlier was removed, the failure strength for nonreinforced concrete was increased to 
62.2  0.9 MPa. Mean Youngs modulus (determined during all loading cycles) was 33.3  2.1 
GPa for the reinforced concrete and 38.8  3.9 GPa for the nonreinforced concrete. Mean 
Poissons ratio (also determined during all loading cycles) was 0.25  0.03 for the reinforced 
concrete and 0.24  0.04 for the nonreinforced concrete. 
6.3.3.5.4 Results: Creep Testing of Cast-In-Place Concrete 
Creep strains versus time for all tests are given in Figure 6.3.3.5-1. The average strains, as 
measured by the two LVDTs, are shown because of the shrinkage exhibited by the strain-gage 
bonding agent. Compression is negative, and so all specimens show axial compression occurring 
at a decreasing rate with increasing time. Three specimens with low steel fiber content were 
tested. One of these was tested at low stress and low temperature (CIP02A), one at low stress and 
high temperature (CIP01A), and one at high stress, high temperature (CIP04A). As expected, 
except for small perturbations or noise in the curves, the strains measured for CIP02A were 
lowest and those measured for CIP01A were highest at any given time. 
Four specimens with high steel fiber content were tested. CIP19A Stage 1 was run at low stress 
and low temperature, CIP19A Stage 2 was run at high stress and low temperature, CIP16A and 
CIP20A were both run at low stress and high temperature, and CIP15A was run at high stress 
and high temperature. It was anticipated that CIP19A Stage 1 would exhibit the lowest strains, 
CIP15A would exhibit the highest strains, and the other tests would provide intermediate results. 
The data basically followed this pattern, except that the two nominally identical tests (CIP16A 
and CIP20A), gave distinctly different results. Also, at early times (<15 days) CIP16A shows 
lower strain than CIP19A Stage 1. 
6.3.3.5.5 Measurement Uncertainty: Laboratory Mechanical Parameters 
The uncertainty in the uniaxial compressive test of rock and concrete includes the accuracy of 
the load cell, the accuracy of the LVDT, specimen alignment, square and parallel of the 
specimen ends, changes in the specimen cross section area during the test, specimen variation, 
and anisotropy of the rock. Among these factors, the greatest uncertainty is with the specimen 
variation. The heterogeneity in the rock-mass will have significant effects on its compressive 
strength and moduli. Many of these uncertainties also apply to thermal expansion and creep 
testing of intact samples. In addition, temperature and stress control contribute to uncertainties in 
thermal expansion and creep testing, respectively. 
6.3.3.6 Field Mechanical Parameters 
The following mechanical field measurements are presented: 
. Plate loading test 
. In situ stress 
. Fracture mapping 
. Rock-mass classification 
. Rock-mass thermal expansion.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-34 September 2002 
6.3.3.6.1 Results: Plate Loading Test 
The Plate Loading Tests (PLT) was conducted as part of the DST. The purpose of the PLT was 
to obtain rock-mass elastic-modulus measurements under ambient and hot conditions for the 
middle nonlithophysal tuff. Two earlier tests were conducted in 1998, after which design 
changes were made to ensure a stiffer loading frame for improved measurements. These 
improved measurements, from the October 2000 test, are summarized in Table 6.3.3.6-1. A 
detailed discussion of the setup, testing procedure, raw test data, and rock-mass modulus 
calculation from the raw data may be found in the documentation for two Output-DTNs: Plate 
Loading Test PLT Test (2000) Displacement and Pressure Data (SN0011F3912298.022 
[158392]) and PLT Test (2000) Rock-mass Modulus Data (SN0011F3912298.023 [158399]). 
6.3.3.6.2 Results: In Situ Stress Measurements 
A series of five successful hydraulic fracturing tests, used to determine in situ stress states, were 
conducted. Test number 4, centered at 19.2 m from the collar of the borehole, yielded the typical 
pressure-time signature obtained during hydraulic fracturing of intact test intervals. The other 
test results showed signs of possible pre-existing fracturing, probably induced during drilling. In 
addition, two tests conducted at approximately 10 m from the alcove may also have been within 
the zone of influence of that excavation. 
Thus, the most reliable hydraulic fracturing results were obtained in test number 4. Based on 
these results, and on the average vertical hydraulic fracture strikes in all tests, the estimate of the 
in situ stress state around borehole ESF-AOD-HDFR#1 is: 
	h = 1.7 (0.1) MPa acting in the N 75 W (+14) 
	H = 2.9 (0.4) MPa acting in the N 15 E (+14) 
The measured in situ stress state is small, which is consistent with the dominant local normal 
faults. The north-northeastern maximum horizontal stress direction is subparallel to the average 
strike of these faults and is supported by previous measurements in the Yucca Mountain area. 
Detailed discussion is presented in a report by SNL (1997 [117471]) and in Section 10.4 of the 
Ambient Characterization of the DST Block (CRWMS M&O 1997 [101539]). 
6.3.3.6.3 Results: Rock-Mass Classification 
Rock-mass quality assessments were performed in all of the thermal testing excavations using 
line mapping surveys and are reported in both the Q rating system (Barton et al. 1974 [101541]) 
and the Rock Mass Rating (RMR) system (Bieniawski 1974 [101567]), using Schmidt Hammer 
Rebound Index Testing as a non-qualified activity. The rock-mass quality data concerning the 
DST have been submitted under DTN: SNF32020196001.015 [158434]. Related data 
surrounding the SHT have been submitted under DTN: SNF32020196001.010 [158314]. Rockmass 
quality assessment was performed in satisfaction of Level 4 Milestone SP5140M4 (Lum 
1997 [159132]). 
While some structural variations within the heated drift were observed, the Q and RMR indices 
were found to be relatively consistent with those found from the repository horizon TSw2 and

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-35 September 2002 
did not display any significant systematic variation relative to location. The Q and RMR indices 
are presented in Tables 6.3.3.6-2 and 6.3.3.6-3, respectively. Note that these tables include data 
that were previously presented as part of the SHT block characterization (CRWMS M&O 1996 
[101428], pp. 8-1 and 8-8), specifically the observation drift from station 5 to station 60, the SHT 
thermomechanical alcove, and the SHT thermomechanical alcove extension. 
Surrounding the DST block, Q indices ranged from 0.761 to 621.875, while RMR indices ranged 
from 51.1 to 97. Note that the Q value of 621.875 is anomalously high. Both Q and RMR indices 
were relatively constant through the TTF, with relatively little scatter in values. The range in Q 
and RMR indices from the TTF was relatively limited compared to that observed from the main 
drift. 
Examining the Q and RMR values from the DST block shows that the observed variation falls 
within the range observed for TSw2 in the main drift. The average RMR and standard deviation 
for the DST block is 74.1  9.1, as compared to 63.7  7.0 for the TSw2 unit in the main drift 
(Table 6.3.3.6-4). This indicates that no significant difference exists in RMR values determined 
from the DST block and TSw2 main drift. Similarly, Q and RMR indices calculated for the SHT 
block also fall within the range observed for TSw2 main drift (DTNs: SNF32020196001.010 
[158314] and SNF32070996001.005 [109620]). 
6.3.3.6.5 Results: Rock-Mass Thermal Expansion 
Rock-mass thermal expansion has been calculated from the DST in situ heating phase data, 
including temperature change for a given axial length from ambient, gage length, and measured 
thermal displacement over the gage length. The rock-mass thermal-expansion coefficient was 
calculated for the DST using selected data from displacement measurement boreholes 81 and 82. 
These boreholes run roughly parallel to the Heated Drift, and extend over a distance of 45 m. 
Much of that distance is in a high-temperature region of relatively constant temperature. 
Table 6.3.3.6-5 lists the rock-mass thermal-expansion coefficients calculated from the DST 
MPBX data from boreholes 81 and 82. It also lists in situ rock values taken from DST and SHT 
samples for comparison. Below boiling, the rock-mass coefficient ranges from 2.0 to 
4.5 .
10-6/C; these values are approximately half of the intact values. As the temperatures 
approach 200C, the rock-mass coefficient values approach the in situ values, with a maximum 
rock-mass coefficient of 12.55 .
10-6/C in the highest temperature range. The calculated values 
for rock-mass thermal expansion are, as expected, lower than the values from intact laboratory 
specimens, because of the ubiquitous presence of vertical fractures in the Tptpmn tuff. The 
fractures would tend to accommodate some of the thermal expansion in the joint stiffness, 
particularly during early heating, because the thermal displacement would be insufficient to 
mechanically close fractures. Also, the 3-D effects of heated rock bounded by lower-temperature 
rock would decrease the net effect of thermal expansion by resisting the thermal displacements in 
adjacent volumes of rock. 
6.3.3.6.6 Measurement Uncertainty: Field Mechanical Parameters 
Measurement uncertainties are numerous because measured uncertainty of the various types of 
measurements. Specifically, data monitoring of original field measurements (temperature and

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-36 September 2002 
MPBX displacements), subjective interpretations, high-pressure complications, fracture spacing, 
fracture aperture, and inelastic time-dependent deformation represent primary uncertainties. In 
many cases, these uncertainties can be mitigated with repetitive measurements. 
6.3.3.7 Scaling along the Roof of the Heated Drift 
The following discussion on scaling along the roof of the Heated Drift is an in-depth, unplanned 
investigation involving mostly observations and measurements. Limited scaling was initially 
observed in the roof of the Heated Drift in four zones, each covering an area less than two square 
meters. Associated with each of these scaling zones are small pieces of rock on the floor that 
have dropped through the 7.5 cm x 7.5 cm openings in the welded wire fabric of the ground 
support system. These scaling zones have been contained by the existing ground support system 
in the manner designed. The scaling behavior is summarily discussed herein in terms of 
background, observations, and conclusions. Observations of the progression of scaling are 
ongoing during the cooling phase of the DST. A white paper was prepared with detailed 
discussion on this subject (Williams 2001 [159516]). 
6.3.3.7.1 Background 
As shown in the Drift Scale Test As-Built Report (CRWMS M&O 1998 [111115], pp. 8-2 and 
8-5), the Heated Drift is isolated from workers and visitors with a bulkhead to provide safety 
from the high temperatures and to isolate the test from external conditions. The planned thermal 
management strategy includes maintaining the drift wall temperature at approximately 200oC. 
This temperature behavior is representative for most of the Heated Drift because of the 
effectiveness of radiation. 
The ground support system for the roof consists of rock bolts and welded wire fabric through the 
first 35 m of the Heated Drift. The support system for the remaining 12.5 m consists of a 
concrete liner, which covers the rockbolts and welded wire fabric, and extends to the far end of 
the Heated Drift (see Figures 6.3.3.7-1 and 6.3.3.7-2, showing layout sketch and pre-heating 
conditions, respectively). 
6.3.3.7.2 Observations 
Visual observations documented on November 16, 1999 indicated the presence of small rock 
chips on the floor located 5 to 20 m from the bulkhead. This observation triggered further 
investigation with the DST remote camera. Although small rock chips were present on the floor, 
there was no evidence of accumulated larger rock fragments retained in the welded wire fabric. 
During a subsequent cleaning and re-installation of the DST bulkhead windows (April 23, 2001), 
loose rock was observed at several locations above the welded wire fabric attached to the roof of 
the Heated Drift. Cables from two instrumented boreholes located 2.7 m and 11.9 m from the 
bulkhead along the longitudinal axis of the Heated Drift were observed to have pulled loose from 
the welded wire fabric. These cables were originally fastened to the wire fabric during 
installation and remained fastened during prior video imaging in October 2000. This suggests 
that much of the scaling had occurred since then. To better characterize the extent of the loose 
rock, remote video imaging of the inside of the Heated Drift was scheduled for the following 
week.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-37 September 2002 
On May 2, 2001, the extent of scaling along the roof of the Heated Drift was further examined. 
Video images were recorded with the DSTs remote video camera and with an additional video 
unit mounted at the bulkhead. In addition, photographs were taken using a 35 mm camera with a 
telephoto lens. The 7.5 cm squares in the welded wire fabric provide a usable reference scale in 
the images. The camera door in the bulkhead was opened and the video equipment prepared. The 
insulated camera box, which contains two video cameras, successfully traveled the full length of 
the rail mounted to the roof of the Heated Drift (see Figure 6.3.3.7-2). One of the cameras 
recorded roof, wall, and floor images by rotating the lens about the longitudinal axis of the 
Heated Drift. However, this camera did not image most of the scaling zones because the 
cameras blind spot (created by rotational limitations of 320o does not allow it to view that part 
of the roof. The second remote camera is forward looking. It was not intended to record images 
along the roof of the Heated Drift. At the far end of the Heated Drift (35-47.5 m from the 
bulkhead), the drift periphery is covered with a concrete liner. The traveling remote camera 
clearly showed that this concrete liner remained intact, with no evidence of fractures or damage 
from heating. 
From the observations, sketches of the scaling zones along the roof were developed. Most of 
these observations were made from the viewing window located on the lower left side of the 
bulkhead. Figure 6.3.3.7-1 shows four zones of observed scaling that were mapped by estimating 
the number of welded wire fabric squares that held loose rock. The three zones closest to the 
bulkhead showed scaling concentrated along the drift crown (i.e., the apex). A fourth zone was 
located about at the 2 oclock position relative to the crown, about 13 m into the Heated Drift. 
For the scaling zone closest to the bulkhead (about 3 m from the bulkhead), the elongated area is 
estimated to be 1.0 m2 (see Figure 6.3.3.7-3). The existing ground support system consists of 3 m 
long Super Swellex rockbolts installed on a one m square pattern and 3 x 3 x W1.9 x W1.9 
welded wire fabric (see Figures 6.3.3.7-2 and 6.3.3.7-3). This ground support was installed above 
the springline of the excavation and continues to perform as designed. For the scaling zone 
located about 7 m from the bulkhead, the lens-shaped area is estimated to be 0.7 m2. At 12.5 m 
from the bulkhead, a somewhat circular zone is estimated to cover an area of about 1.6 m2. 
Located close to the collar or instrument head of a multi-point borehole extensometer referred to 
as MPBX-3 (see Section 6.3.3.1), the fourth scaling zone covers an area of approximately 0.6 
m2. The loose rock fragments appear to have thickness between 2-5 cm. The ground support is 
expected to retain the scaling. 
Other scaling zones may exist further from the bulkhead; however, observation and 
characterization was hindered because of distance and lighting constraints in these zones. Small 
chips of rock observed along the floor suggest that additional scaling zones exist. Even the 
characterization of the two scaling zones located at 12 m and 13 m from the bulkhead was 
difficult because of the distance from the viewing window and poor illumination. 
The ground support system that was installed during the Heated Drift excavation approximately 
fours years ago, is functioning as designed. There is not any evidence of failed components or 
deep fractures. Pieces of rock that were held by the welded wire fabric varied in diameter from 
about 5 cm (silver dollar size) to about 20 cm (dinner plate size). The loose rock fragments, 
which were mostly flattened shapes, were indicative of rock scaling.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-38 September 2002 
In addition to the remote video run, the YMP project photographer set up digital video and still 
photography equipment on the door platform for the remote camera. From that vantage point, 
high-resolution images of the loose rocks held by the rockbolts and welded wire fabric at several 
of the zones described above were obtained. Photographs of the roof suggest that most of the 
observed scaling zones are associated with uneven surfaces or ridges left by the alpine mining 
machine during excavation of the Heated Drift. This observation is not surprising, since these 
irregular ridges should experience higher stress concentrations and thus more failure than 
smoother surfaces along the drift periphery. 
6.3.3.7.3 Conclusions 
The occurrence of limited scaling from four small zones along the roof of the Heated Drift of the 
DST is not unexpected. The middle nonlithophysal rock (Tptpmn) is highly fractured, and 
additional fractures were likely created during the drift construction process. This altered zone 
around the drift, especially above the Heated Drift, is also exacerbated by: 
. Uneven surfaces generated by the alpine miner during drift excavation 
. Aggressive heating that is estimated to be 6 and 12 times the areal thermal loading 
associated with the current design and alternative low-temperature designs, respectively 
. Transient reversal of the maximum principal stress from a vertical (ambient) to 
horizontal (heating) orientation. More simply stated, the changing stress differences 
along the room periphery as a result of DST heating 
. Proximity of instrumentation and rock-bolt holes to the observed scaling zones. 
The addition of heat increases the circumferential stresses around the Heated Drift, creating 
conditions that would lead to small amounts of rock scaling from the roof. The fallen rocks are 
shaped like flat plates, which is consistent with the development of circumferential fractures by a 
thermally induced biaxial stress state. 
The amount of fallen rock observed is relatively small, which would indicate that rock damage is 
superficial. This conclusion is further supported by mechanical (MPBX) measurements, which 
do not indicate large-scale, deeply penetrating rock movements, but rather that the effects of 
scaling are limited to the surface of the Heated Drift. 
The existing ground support system comprised mostly of rock bolts and welded wire fabric 
continues to perform as designed. Despite the appearance of inelastic deformation, onsite 
personnel who have much experience assessing ground support systems believe that the welded 
wire fabric and rock bolts remain competent and will continue to support the existing loose rock 
in the observed scaling zones. 
Given the superficial nature of the observed scaling zones, adverse consequences of these scaling 
zones are expected to minimally impact the performance of the DST. To date, test equipment, 
instrumentation, and sensors have not been damaged. Ground support of rock bolts and welded 
wire fabric has functioned as expected for controlling and containing this type of rock behavior. 
The occurrence of the observed scaling zones does not appear to affect conceptual understanding

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-39 September 2002 
of the thermal-mechanical behavior of the rock-mass involving pre-closure and post-closure 
performance of the potential repository. 
6.3.4 DST Chemical Measurements 
This section presents chemical data that have been collected from the DST and intended for the 
validation of thermal-hydrological-chemical processes by numerical modeling. The following 
subsections will discuss, respectively, aqueous chemistry (6.3.4.1), gas chemistry and isotopic 
compositions (6.3.4.2), mineralogical and petrologic analyses (6.3.4.3), strontium and uranium 
isotopic compositions of water samples (6.3.4.4), and special investigations of waters with high 
fluoride concentrations (6.3.4.5). 
6.3.4.1 DST Aqueous Chemistry 
Periodically, during the heating phase, water samples have been collected from multiple 
locations throughout the DST block and analyzed in the laboratory for concentrations of metals, 
anions, and certain isotopes. Aqueous sampling is conducted from boreholes, instrumented to 
include water and gas sampling capabilities. The boreholes are (by design) drilled to intersect 
regions of the thermally perturbed rock that would be undergoing different thermal-hydrologicalchemical 
processes (boiling, drying, condensing, dissolving and precipitating) at different times. 
For pre-heating baseline data, pore water was obtained from centrifuged cores of boreholes 182 
184 (ESF-HD-PERM1PERM3) on the other side of the Connecting Drift across from the DST 
block. The concentrations of inorganic ions have been measured and reported. Otherwise, all of 
the analytical data reported in this section are from samples derived during heating from 
boreholes constructed for water sampling within the DST block. 
A series of boreholes equipped with two types of fluid sampling systems was installed into the 
DST. First, ten boreholes were instrumented with FLUTe. liners (Flexible Liner Underground 
Technologies, Ltd.) designed specifically for sampling water and gas for chemical analyses. 
(Liners installed into the different thermal field tests were manufactured by both SEAMISTTM 
and by FLUTe.TM Although FLUTeTM provided all of the liners used in the DST, in some 
documents they continued to be referred to as SEAMISTTM liners. (e.g., Section 5.1.4 of the 
Drift Scale Test As-Built Report (CRWMS M&O 1998 [111115])). These are the chemistry 
boreholes, ESF-HD-CHE-(1-10) (or boreholes 52-56 and 69-73, as shown in Figure 6.3-7). 
Second, boreholes instrumented with inflatable packer strings were designed with airpermeability 
testing as the primary function (see Section 6.3.2.4). Observations during the SHT 
(see Section 6.2.4.1) demonstrated how the system could be effectively implemented in fluid 
sampling. These are the hydrology boreholes, ESF-HD-HYD-(1-12) (or boreholes 57-61, 74-78, 
185-186, shown in Figure 6.3-4). 
Both the chemistry and the hydrology boreholes were expected to provide opportunities for 
water collection throughout thermal testing. The chemistry boreholes, with proper spacing of 
high absorbency pads, would yield good spatial and temporal coverage of geochemical data even 
with small volumes of water. The hydrology boreholes, with inflated packers that straddle highly 
fractured regions of rock, would potentially accumulate water as moisture entered along the 510 
m of opening. Generally, although both systems employed proven technology, the high

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-40 September 2002 
temperatures of the DST would place somewhat unusual requirements on materials used for their 
construction. 
For the FLUTe. liners, a high-temperature silicon rubber was selected to ensure flexibility and 
durability for the often-repeated liner installation and retrieval processes. Unfortunately, the 
liners themselves never performed to expectations, either under the thermal load of the DST or 
with sufficient strength to survive repeated manipulations against the irregular and sharp features 
of the borehole walls. For the inflatable packers, two high-temperature rubbers were selected. 
Among the cooler regions of rock, a neoprene rubber was employed, and in the hottest boreholes, 
a fluorocarbon rubber was employed. Both proved to be mechanically sound, but not chemically 
inert in the hotter boreholes. In this section, the geochemistry of water samples that have been 
collected in the DST will be discussed. Although attempts were made to salvage the installed 
liner systems of the chemistry boreholes, those attempts proved to be unsuccessful. 
Consequently, the aqueous sampling role of the hydrology boreholes has been critical, and the 
analyses of waters collected from them form the aqueous geochemistry database of the DST. 
The field measurement data are identified with data in DTNs: MO0207AL5WATER.001 
[159300], MO0101SEPFDDST.000 [153711] and SN0203F3903102.001 [159133]. 
Analytical data acquired by Inductively Coupled Plasma and Atomic Emission Spectroscopy 
(ICP/AES) and Ion Chromatography (IC) for metals and anions respectively are performed under 
the control of the technical implementation procedures, TIP-AC-02 for metal concentrations and 
TIP-AC-03 for anion analyses. The standard metals suite includes: Al, B, Ca, Fe, K, Li, Mg, Na, 
S, Si, and Sr; trace metals analyses are available upon request. The standard anion suite includes 
the following: F, Cl, Br, NO2, NO3, PO4, and SO4. The analytical results are in the TDMS 
identified with data in the following DTNs: MO0005PORWATER.000 [150930], 
LL001100931031.008 [153288], LL001200231031.009 [153616], LL020302223142.015 
[159134], and LL020405123142.019 [159307]. 
6.3.4.1.1 Sampling Procedures 
In this section, water sampling in the hydrology boreholes is described. The 12 hydrology 
boreholes instrumented with strings of inflatable packers were located in three arrays sketched in 
Figure 6.3.4.1-1. (The angles of inclination are exaggerated; black markers identify the packer 
locations along the borehole lengths.) When inflated, the packers formed isolated open intervals 
that are referred to as test zones. Test zone 1 for a given borehole is defined to be the interval 
between the packer closest to the Observation Drift, and the next closest packer. All the zones 
continue to be numbered sequentially, with the deepest zone (zone 3 or 4) defined by the deepest 
packer and the borehole bottom. To implement the packer system as a water collection device in 
the DST, the air-injection lines used in the air-permeability testing become the sampling tubes to 
pump water out into the Observation Drift. The air-injection tubing opens to the lowest elevation 
of each zone. If fluids enter the zone by fracture flow, they would potentially drain to the bottom, 
where access to the tube opening would be possible. The provisions for water capture and 
retention, however, would be somewhat dubious, since the boreholes would be expected to act as 
capillary barriers to liquid flow. Nevertheless, experience in the SHT demonstrated that fluid 
would enter into some of the intervals, collect in the lowest end, and remain until pumping could

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-41 September 2002 
be conducted. Water samples obtained from these zones, were potentially derived from the entire 
open interval, a length of ~510 m. 
Water sampling has been conducted by peristaltic pumping of individual zones on a regular and 
on an as-needed basis. The zones that have produced water samples during water collection 
activities in the DST heating stage are indicated in Figure 6.3.4.1-1. In addition, a couple of 
opportunities to collect DST borehole waters presented themselves to other thermal test 
personnel; water samples collected opportunistically were done so without the benefit of 
standard sampling instrumentation, analytical field testing, and field preservation. These 
miscellaneous waters are not represented in Figure 6.3.4.1-1 or in the compilation of field data to 
follow. During water sampling activities, all zones are pumped for at least five minutes. Thus, 
zones that may be well above the boiling temperature, ~96C, are pumped along with lowertemperature 
zones. An important observation has been the collection of water from some of the 
highest temperature zones. In these boreholes, heated water vapor that was pumped through the 
sample tubing condensed as it was pulled away from the hot sampled area to the cooler vicinity 
of the Observation Drift. The condensed water vapor was then collected in the field as a sample 
of water. The intervals that have produced condensed water vapor are indicated in the same 
diagram. 
Water sampling from boreholes in the relatively dry host rock of the DST precludes practices 
that are common to sampling in saturated formations from an essentially unlimited water supply. 
Water volumes typically collected from a borehole zone are ~1001500 mL. As a consequence, 
conservation measures are generally followed to maximize the information that may be gained 
from analytical tests. To collect water from individual zones in the hydrology boreholes, a 
peristaltic pump located in the Observation Drift was connected to an air-injection line through a 
manifold located outside each borehole array. Before sampling a zone, the peristaltic pump was 
prepared with clean sample tubing for the intake and the output lines, or the installed tubing 
might be thoroughly flushed with de-ionized water. Pumping was initiated once the hose from 
the pump to the manifold and from the pump to the collection vessel were in place. An optional 
vacuum gauge might be inserted into the intake line. (Gauge readings could then be used to 
indicate whether the air-injection line from the borehole was submersed in water or is open.) 
The collected samples were designated for field-testing and various analytical suites; samples 
designated for analyses were prioritized based on acquired sample volumes. Field-testing 
included temperature and temperature-dependent measurements of pH, total dissolved solids 
(TDS), electrical conductivity (EC). When sufficient sample was available, an alkalinity titration 
could be performed. From the measured alkalinity, the samples carbonate, bicarbonate, and 
hydroxide concentrations could be calculated. Samples designated for laboratory analysis were 
filtered in the field (. 0.45 .m), collected into certifiably clean sample bottles, and preserved. 
The samples to be collected for analysis may included: (1) a metals sample filtered into a 
polyethylene bottle and acidified to pH . 2 using Ultrapure nitric acid; (2) an anion sample 
filtered, collected in a polyethylene bottle, and preserved in cold storage; (3) isotope samples for 
Sr and U analyses filtered into plastic bottles and acidified to pH < 2 using Ultrapure nitric acid; 
and (4) stable-isotopes sample (C, H, and O), filtered and collected in glass sample bottles. 
The DST aqueous sampling and field characterization has evolved with the practical experience 
gained. After the first year, the sampling protocol and field-testing were reviewed. Members of

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-42 September 2002 
the thermal test team participated to recommend and draft the new field procedure, TIP-NF-33, 
which has remained the governing procedure for water sampling activities. As part of that effort, 
expanded field geochemistry was incorporated (requiring the purchase of additional supplies and 
test equipment), and priorities were placed upon the analyses to be performed. Limited sample 
volumes have and will continue to be the single factor restricting chemical characterization of 
DST waters. Upon completion of field activities, samples have been delivered to the SMF and 
stored under refrigeration until further instruction, or the collected samples shipped directly to 
individual principal investigators. 
6.3.4.1.2 Results: Aqueous Chemistry 
Field Measurements and Observations 
Aqueous samples collected for chemical analyses have been acquired from several hydrology 
boreholes during the four years of heating. The first samples were collected six months after 
heating began, with subsequent sampling activities about every two to three months (more or less 
frequently as indicated). A summary of the water samples, the field data, and important 
observations for samples collected up to January 14, 2002 is presented in Table 6.3.4.1-1. 
Samples are reported and tracked by the Sample Management Facility (SMF) code assigned in 
the fieldan 8-digit number, generally preceded by SPC. Although the assigned SMF codes 
are formally used for sample and data traceability, for written and oral communication among 
the thermal test team, reference to a sample is generally by borehole location and zone and 
collection date. The borehole numbers that are used in the Table 6.3.4.1-1 are the sequentially 
numbered DST boreholes (Figure 6.3-4). 
Each row in Table 6.3.4.1-1 is a tabulation of relevant information recorded for a single sample. 
The information may include collection date, start and stop pumping times, total approximate 
volume, location by borehole number and zone (BH# - zone), field data, sample number (SMF 
ID), sample temperature (measured in the field at time of collection), comments and 
observations. The information represented derives from different personnel (with varying 
degrees of experience), different field-test equipment, and differences in working 
instrumentation and supplies. The table does not present sampling efforts in which no water was 
collected. 
In Table 6.3.4.1-1, temperature entries represent those values measured in the field during 
sampling and do not represent the in situ borehole temperatures (which are recorded by the DST 
Data Collection System). Furthermore, the temperature-dependent field properties, (i.e., pH, 
TDS, and EC) were determined for the measured temperature reported. A multi-parameter fieldtest 
meter measures and automatically compensates for temperature, using the known thermal 
sensitivity of the glass electrode. The pumping start and stop times are included whenever the 
information was noted. The stated pumping times by themselves are not important, but, together 
with the estimated volume, they give an approximate sample flow rate. It has been observed that 
zones with accumulated water exhibited generally higher flow rates than ones that, for example, 
were produced by steam condensing in the sampling line (cf. Figure 6.3.4.1-1: Water vapor 
collection zones compared to liquid water collection zones). Finally, although alkalinity is a field 
measurement, it is incorporated with the table of analytical results that follow. Measured 
alkalinity was an important addition incorporated in the revised sampling procedure, but the

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-43 September 2002 
titration requires ~100 mL of sample. Consequently, for zones that produce low water volumes, 
alkalinity is not generally measured because of insufficient sample volumes. 
Finally, in reviewing Table 6.3.4.1-1, an attempt to interpret the lack of water from different 
borehole zones, as suggested by gaps in the data, should be avoided. Field personnel generally 
allowed several minutes pumping time from each interval. However, the fact that no water was 
acquired does not necessarily indicate a dry zone; it may also reflect a failed packer seal (see 
Table 6.3.2.4-4 for list of failed packers), clogged sampling tube, or inadequate pump pressure. 
Laboratory Analyses 
Water samples collected from the hydrology boreholes are prioritized for several analytical tests 
including major ion chemistry and certain isotope analyses. Metal and anion concentrations 
measured by ICP/AES and IC, respectively, are reported in this section. The major ion data 
compiled for the samples analyzed are presented in Table 6.3.4.1-2; values for pH and HCO3 
(measured in the field) are included for convenience. 
In Table 6.3.4.1-2, the SMF sample identifications are traceable to the field activities recorded in 
Table 6.3.4.1-1. (The exception is for baseline water acquired from pore water centrifuged from 
boreholes 182 (ESF-HD-PERM1) through 184 (ESF-HD-PERM3). Different conventions have 
been followed for assigning the unique SMF identification number used in both tables. Water 
samples are pumped during a sampling trip, and collected into different bottles designated for 
analyses. Entries in Table 6.3.4.1-2 reflect two conventions that have been followed: First, in a 
given sampling trip all sample bottles filled from one zone have been assigned a single SPC#; 
additional descriptions may record a date and time that the sample was acquired for 
distinguishing the order. Second, a unique SMF identifier is assigned to each of the bottles 
collected from a single zone, and the relevant date and time are recorded. It is worth noting that 
samples for metal and anion analyses identified with the same SPC# are not more closely related 
than samples identified with different SPC# (entries in Table 6.3.4.1-2 might appear to suggest 
otherwise). This is important because several samples collected one after another have exhibited 
increasingly dilute chemistries with continued pumping. Similar evidence is also observed in 
field data when multiple samples from a zone are tested and recorded. 
Chemical analyses have been reported from water samples collected from each of the three 
borehole arrays (see Figure 6.3.4.1-1) and from boreholes located both above and below the 
Heated Drift. Most of the aqueous samples collected and analyzed would appear to fall into two 
main groups: (1) Water samples for which chemistries have been consistent with mineral/water 
interactions, particularly fracture lining minerals such as silica polymorphs and calcium 
carbonate. Intervals from which these waters derive are below and up to boiling (~96.C) 
temperatures. (2) Very dilute water samples obtained from intervals near or above boiling that 
were consistent with derivation from condensed moisture in the sampling line. From the 
beginning, these samples were not considered to add value to the aqueous geochemistry study 
and were thought unnecessary for collection. However, it has been up to individual field 
personnel working in concert with the aqueous sampling procedure, whether to collect and save 
the samples. Generally, all zones were pumped during the field collection trips, and no 
distinctions were made for samples derived from condensed water vapor.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-44 September 2002 
Some trends may be observed among the first group of samples. First, measured pH values range 
from ~6.1 to 8.3. Concentrations for specific analytes were variable, but the trends were similar. 
In general, SO4 and Cl were the dominant anions; Si is the principal metal, followed by Ca and 
Na (having similar concentrations to each other). Present, but in lower concentrations, were K, 
Mg, Sr, and NO3. (These data were different from chemistry of the baseline pore water samples 
and were unrelated to construction water, which had a bromide tracer of ~20 ppm.) This class 
included a small number of water samples with very distinctive, concentrated water. Borehole 
59-4 (11/98 and 01/99) in particular appeared to exhibit evaporatively concentrated water, and 
boreholes 59-2 (08/99) and 76-3 (10/99) had somewhat higher concentrations of the principal 
analytes observed. 
Some samples could be recognized in the field and by laboratory analyses as deriving from 
condensed vapor and generally showing little or no water/rock interaction. The samples 
generally had lower pH values (approximately 4.0  6.0) and low TDS and EC. These samples 
were collected from hotter boreholes, at boiling temperatures and higher. The analytical results 
from the samples indicate the compositions are consistent with relatively pure water. (These 
analyses were generally of little interest; they were therefore not routinely submitted to the 
TDMS.) On the other hand, condensates from the highest temperature intervals (>140.C) 
exhibited lower pH values (<4.0) than might be expected from the effect of CO2-bearing steam 
condensation alone. These samples also exhibit values of TDS and EC that are not negligible and 
have unusually high fluoride concentrations (566 mg/L). Further field-testing was carried out to 
investigate the cause of the unexpected fluoride concentration for these water samples. These 
investigations are discussed in detail in Section 6.3.4.5. 
6.3.4.1.3 Measurement Uncertainty: Aqueous Chemistry 
Field Sampling 
The procedures developed for use in the field were intended to support the analytical data that 
ultimately would derive from the collected samples. Measures included obtaining field values for 
some unstable properties on calibrated instruments (e.g., pH, EC, TDS, and alkalinity) and 
appropriately treating and preserving specific samples (e.g., filtering, acidifying, and storing in 
appropriate bottles). Every effort was made to accomplish these goals during each sampling trip. 
However, occasionally, for reasons outside the field technicians control (e.g., a meter battery 
was out, replacement bottles and supplies had not arrived before the sampling trip.), the protocol 
could not be followed in its entirety. In those cases, samples were collected (the most important 
objective) and deviations were described in field notes. These types of issues were not 
considered to have significant impact on the actual data. Although attempts were made to 
minimize the time between collection and analysis, delays in getting samples delivered from the 
SMF were regularly encountered. When redrafting the protocol after the first year of heating, 
many of the issues were addressed. 
The use of peristaltic pumping to acquire water from the hydrology boreholes is generally 
considered a suitable method for obtaining a representative, in situ DST water sample. However, 
certain conditions inherent to the thermal test environment may introduce uncertainty into some 
geochemical parameters. First, because of the relatively dry host rock, most water accumulations 
are insufficient to achieve and maintain water-filled lines during the sample collection process.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-45 September 2002 
(In the field, this is evidenced by air bubbles in the sample tubing.) Potentially, water passing 
through the tubing may equilibrate with air in the line and thereby affect the concentrations of 
dissolved gases (CO2 for example). Another issue previously mentioned is important when water 
is pumped to sequentially fill multiple bottles. Water samples clearly marked as to the order in 
which they become filled (see time notations in Tables 6.3.4.1-1 and corresponding analyses in 
Table 6.3.4.1-2) may exhibit increasingly dilute concentrations with time. This suggests that as 
the standing water in the borehole is depleted, the heated vapors present condense and dilute 
water in the line. This effectively becomes a problem because (for example) if the initial sample 
is designated and preserved for metals testing, the second sample is designated for anions, and 
the final sample is used for field measurements (pH, EC, and bicarbonate), then a charge balance 
calculation and a check of the electrical neutrality would indicate inconsistency. This condition 
taken to its extreme gives rise to samples derived solely from condensed vapor. 
Laboratory Analyses 
For both ICP/AES and IC, method detection limits (MDL) are determined for each analyte. The 
MDL represents the minimum concentration that can be identified, measured, and reported with 
99% confidence that the analyte concentration is greater than zero. Generally, reportable 
concentrations (as established by laboratory chemists) are required to be greater than 35 times 
the MDL. For the concentrations reported in Table 6.3.4.1-2, values determined to be less than 
the reportable limit are indicated as nondetected (therefore, no distinction is made for analytes 
that are present at some very low level and those with no measurable concentration). 
An additional uncertainty that may be introduced into analytical results occurs for samples that 
require some level of dilution. Samples may need to be diluted when concentrations exceed the 
measurement range for analytes of interest; or, if the total sample volume is very small, reagent 
grade water may be added to extend the sample. In such cases, the concentration measured, as 
well as the limits of detection, are multiplied by the dilution ratio. The result is that very small 
errors are exaggerated. 
Holding times are another source of uncertainty (and might just as easily be considered in the 
field-sampling section as in the analytical results). Ideally, all sample analyses should be 
performed as soon after sample collection as possible to ensure that the analyses are 
representative of the in situ water chemistry. The EPA has established maximum hold times, 
which are almost universally recognized for drinking water analyses. As guidance for the DST 
borehole water samples, the EPA hold times, which typically ranged from 2 to 25 days, were 
suggested in the protocol (TIP-AC-03). The guidelines have generally been met, with the 
exception of the holding time recommendations for NO3, NO2, and PO4. The measured 
concentrations for these less stable anions may be impacted as a result. 
Quality control in the analytical laboratories is maintained using reagent blanks, laboratory 
control samples, and matrix spiked samples submitted in duplicate with sample batches (~10 
samples or less). Analytical precision is assessed using the duplicate analyses of both the 
laboratory control and matrix spiked samples (typically prepared with analyte concentrations 
approximately midpoint of that expected for the samples). Acceptance limits for measured 
concentrations in the control samples are . 10% of the known true value. The accuracy of the 
results is based upon the percent recoveries for each analyte in the control and matrix spiked

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-46 September 2002 
samples; the total recoveries of method analytes in the control sample and matrix spiked sample 
must be within 80120% to be acceptable. 
6.3.4.2 Gas Chemistry 
Gas samples were periodically collected from the hydrology boreholes (see Figure 6.3-4) during 
the heating phase from December 3, 1997, through January 14, 2002. The purpose of these 
samples was to measure the concentration and carbon isotope ratio of CO2 and the hydrogen and 
oxygen isotope ratios of water vapor. The concentration and isotopic composition of CO2 in the 
Heated Drift and the Observation Drift were also measured during the test. In addition, to 
provide data on the background concentration and isotopic composition of CO2 in the rock, two 
gas samples were collected in August 1997 from borehole 182 (one of the ambient testing 
boreholes drilled on the opposite side of the Connecting Drift across from the DST block). The 
CO2 concentrations and isotope compositions for both the gas samples and the condensate 
samples collected in 16 sampling trips through the heating phase are in the TDMS under the 
following DTNs: LB980420123142.005 [111471], LB980715123142.003 [111472], 
LB981016123142.004 [113278], LB990630123142.003 [111476], LB000121123142.003 
[146451], LB000718123142.003 [158342], LB0102CO2DST98.001 [159306], 
LB0108CO2DST05.001 [156888], LB0203CO2DSTEH.001 [158349], LB0206C14DSTEH.001 
[159303]. 
6.3.4.2.1 Gas Sampling 
Gas samples were pumped from the 12 hydrology boreholes (57-61, 74-78, and 185-186). Each 
hydrology borehole was separated into three or four intervals by strings of high-temperature, 
inflatable packers. High-temperature plastic tubes (that function as conduits for both air injection 
in permeability measurements and fluid sampling) led from each interval in the boreholes to the 
Observation Drift. For gas sampling, the tube leading to the interval to be sampled was isolated 
and connected to a diaphragm pump with a moisture trap. For higher-temperature intervals 
(greater than ~50C), a 4C gas chiller unit was placed before the pump to condense the water 
vapor from the gas before collection. 
After purging the interval and sample tubing for 45 minutes, the gas samples were collected in 
1-liter Tedlar bags from the outlet of the diaphragm pump. The normal pumping speed for the 
pump is 60 L/min, however, airflow rates during sampling varied considerably, depending on 
factors such as the permeability of the interval, the temperature, and the air moisture content. In 
particular, when the temperature in an interval was near the boiling temperature or above, water 
vapor constituted the major component of the gas phase (>98%). Since most of the water vapor 
was being stripped from the gas before it entered the pump, the flow of noncondensable gas out 
of the pump was very low (to <1 L/min). 
The water vapor condensed in the chiller trap was sampled for oxygen and hydrogen isotope 
measurements. The condensate in the water trap was comprised of all of the water vapor that 
condensed in the trap throughout the pumping period, including the time during which the 
sampling interval was being purged. Sampling times for the vapor condensates ranged from 
approximately 20 minutes for cooler intervals (up to about 80C) to as little as 5 minutes for the 
higher-temperature intervals, resulting from the high vapor contents of the intervals near the

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-47 September 2002 
boiling point. After each sample was collected, the chiller trap was thoroughly dried, and the 
chiller unit was purged with dry tunnel air for at least 5 minutes before collection of the next 
sample was begun. 
Air samples from the Observation Drift were collected using the diaphragm pump to fill a 3-liter 
Tedlar bag. Samples of the Heated Drift were collected by attaching the pump to a 0.25 inch 
stainless steel tube leading to approximately the mid-point of the drift. The sample was taken 
after purging the tube for ~5 minutes. To determine the initial concentration and isotopic 
composition of CO2 in the rock, two gas samples from borehole 182 were collected during 
August 1998. To take these samples, an inflatable packer was installed approximately 20 m into 
the borehole. The first sample was collected after the borehole was purged for approximately 5 
minutes. The second sample was taken after the interval had been pumped for almost 24 hours. 
6.3.4.2.2 Results: CO2 Concentration 
The CO2 and isotopic compositions are given in Table 6.3.4.2-1. The CO2 concentrations in the 
gas samples were measured using two different instruments. Initially, the laboratory 
measurements of the CO2 concentrations for these samples were only intended to gain an 
estimate of the amount of CO2 that should be produced during separation of the CO2 from the 
samples intended for isotopic analyses. The CO2 concentrations in the rock were supposed to be 
analyzed in situ with a Columbus Instruments Model 180C Gas Analyzer. However, because of 
problems with the sampling technique for the in situ measurements and the gas analyzer, the only 
CO2 concentration data from the first 3 years of heating are the laboratory data for the samples 
listed in Table 6.3.4.2-1. Starting in January 2001, the CO2 concentrations of the isotope samples 
were analyzed using the Columbus Instrument gas analyzer at the site calibrated with qualified 
standards. Both the laboratory and field analytical techniques are outlined below, and a 
comparison of the data for samples analyzed by both methods is presented. 
For the first 3 years of the DST, the samples were transported back to a labratory for analysis. 
The CO2 concentrations in the samples are measured using an infrared analyzer (Li-Cor) in the 
Amundson Laboratory at the University of California, Berkeley. For analyses, 5 cc of gas was 
injected into the CO2 analyzer and compared to a 500 ppm standard. At low concentrations 
(=2,000 ppm or 0.2% v/v), the precision of this technique was approximately  1% of the 
measured value. At higher concentrations, the analyses were out of the range of the standard 
used to calibrate the instrument, and the precision is not as good (see discussion below). 
Beginning in January 2001, samples were also analyzed using the Columbus Instruments Model 
180C Gas Analyzer at the ESF. For these analyses, approximately 250 cc of gas was fed into the 
instrument and analyzed after calibration with a qualified standard gas. For samples with lower 
concentrations (=1% v/v), the analyses were done using the low-range sensor calibrated with a 
0.504% CO2 standard. These analyses are accurate to approximately 0.05%. Higher 
concentration samples (>1% v/v) were measured with the high-range sensor calibrated with a 
4.995% CO2 standard, with accuracy of  0.3%. 
For comparison between the two instruments, Table 6.3.4.2-2 shows analyses using both 
techniques on January 2001 samples. At the lower end (less than 0.05%), the Li-Cor analyses 
tend to be a bit higher than the Columbus Instruments analyses. For this case, the Li-Cor data are

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-48 September 2002 
probably better, since the standard used for comparison on this instrument was a 0.05% standard. 
At higher concentrations, the Li-Cor data are consistently lower than Columbus Instruments data. 
For these samples, the Columbus Instruments data are more reliable, because they were 
measured using calibration gases in the same range of concentration. The data for samples with 
CO2 concentrations greater than 0.2% are plotted on Figure 6.3.4.2-1. As would be expected, 
there is a strong linear correlation between the data measured with the Li-Cor and the data 
measured with the Columbus Instruments analyzer. In general, for samples with CO2 
concentrations greater than 0.2%, the Li-Cor measurements are low by approximately 16%. 
6.3.4.2.3 Results: Isotopic Composition of CO2 
After measuring the CO2 concentration in the gas samples, the CO2 was cryogenically separated 
from the samples for isotopic analyses. The CO2 isotopic compositions are also given in Table 
6.3.4.2-1. For large enough yields of CO2 (>30 .moles), two aliquots of CO2 were collected. The 
stable carbon (
13C value) and oxygen (
18O value) isotope ratios aliquot was analyzed 
according to the YMP Technical Implementing Procedure YMP-LBNL-TIP/TT-7.0, Extraction 
and Analysis of the Stable Isotopic Compositions of CO2 in Gas Samples for Isotopic Analyses. If 
there were problems with the first analysis, then the split was used for a second stable isotope 
analysis. If there were no problems, then the splits were catalogued and stored for possible 
radiocarbon (14C) analysis. 
6.3.4.2.4 Results: Isotopic Analyses of Vapor Condensate Samples 
The hydrogen and oxygen isotope compositions of the vapor-condensate samples were measured 
to gain an estimate of the isotopic composition of the pore water in the rock (Table 6.3.4.2-3). 
The hydrogen isotope ratios (
D values) were measured following YMP Technical 
Implementing Procedure YMP-LBNL-TIP/TT-9.0, Hydrogen Isotope Analyses of Water. The 
oxygen isotope ratios (
18O values) were measured following YMP Technical Implementing 
Procedure YMP-LBNL-TIP/TT-10.0, Analysis of the Oxygen Isotopic Composition of Water 
Samples Using the Isoprep 18.
The isotopic composition of the pore water can be calculated 
from the isotopic composition of the vapor (Horita and Wesolowski 1994 [159108]), assuming 
that the pore water is in isotopic equilibrium with the vapor in the gas samples at the temperature 
of the rock. This information can provide valuable insights into the degree of dryout in the rock 
and the extent of vapor transport. 
6.3.4.2.5 Measurement Uncertainty: Concentration and Isotopic Ratios 
CO2 Concentration 
Besides the uncertainties associated with the measurements, there were a number of other factors 
that affected the measured CO2 concentrations. These are listed below, together with an 
assessment of the potential impact on the measured CO2 concentrations: 
1. Removal of water vapor from the samplesCondensing the water vapor from the samples 
will lead to measurement of high CO2 concentrations in the gas relative to the actual 
concentrations of pore gas in the rock. This is very significant in intervals at or above the

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-49 September 2002 
boiling point. However, the magnitude of this effect can be calculated by assuming that 
the gas in the rock was saturated with water vapor at the temperature of the rock. 
2. Small leaks in the sampling apparatusThis could lead to some contamination of the 
samples with air from the Observation Drift. This was probably not significant except in 
samples where the gas flow rates were very low (e.g., those intervals with high vapor 
contents in the gas). In those instances, the measured concentrations could be diluted by 
as much as 50% relative to the actual concentrations. 
3. Other tests using the hydrology boreholesThe hydrology boreholes were used for a 
variety of other measurements, including air-permeability tests and sampling of water. 
The impact of water sampling was probably minimal, but the air-permeability 
measurements (which consisted of injecting N2 gas into the intervals) could significantly 
dilute the CO2. As much as possible, gas sampling was scheduled just before any airpermeability 
tests were performed to minimize the effects of the air-permeability 
measurements on the CO2 measurements. 
4. Deflated packersOver time, several packers in the hydrology boreholes developed leaks 
and deflated (see Table 6.3.2.4-4 for a list of deflated packers and the dates they became 
deflated). This was especially prevalent in the higher-temperature intervals. Even when 
deflated, the packers still formed a barrier between the intervals (their deflated diameter 
is only slightly less than the diameter of the borehole). However, it is likely that samples 
taken from intervals with deflated packers contained some gas from the intervals on the 
other side of the deflated packers. After April 2000 (when the problem became more 
prevalent), investigators began noting which samples were collected from intervals with 
deflated packers by including the adjacent intervals in the sample name. For instance, 
when the packer between interval 3 and 4 in borehole 57 was deflated and a sample was 
collected from interval 3, the sampling interval was noted as 57-3/4 indicating that the 
sample was taken from borehole 57, interval 3, but may contain input from interval 4. 
Several of the packers began leaking before April 2000 and were deflated (most notably 
in borehole 77), but this was not indicated by the sampling interval. 
5. Refer to precision and accuracy discussion in Section 6.3.4.2.2. 
Isotopic Composition of Pore Water Estimated from That of Condensate 
There are a number of uncertainties that limit the reliability of these measurements for that 
purpose: 
1. Temperature uncertaintiesThe temperature can vary significantly within an interval, 
making it difficult to determine the temperature to use for calculating the isotopic 
composition of the water. 
2. Condensation in sample tubingDuring sampling, the water vapor moves from the hot 
temperatures in the rock to the cooler temperatures in the Observation Drift. This can 
lead to significant condensation of water vapor in the tubing prior to the chiller unit. This 
effect is believed to have been minimal because of the large volume of air flushed 
through the tubing and the increase in the temperature of the tubing during sampling.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-50 September 2002 
However, this still may account for some loss of vapor prior to the chiller unit. Since the 

D and 
18O values of the vapor are lower than those of the liquid, this will cause the 
isotopic composition of the water vapor that reaches the condensate trap to be lower than 
the composition of the water vapor in the rock. 
3. Inefficient trapping by the chiller unitThe chiller unit used for this sampling was not 
capable of completely cooling high-temperature water vapor (>80C) to 4C. As a result, 
a fraction of the water vapor in the higher-temperature samples passed through the chiller 
unit. The water vapor that does not condense in the trap will have lower 
D and 
18O 
values than the water in the trap, which will lead to high values for the condensate. To 
minimize this effect, any water in the pump trap (generally <10 ml) after the chiller unit 
was mixed back into the water in the chiller trap. Altogether, the amount of water vapor 
loss is believed to be less than 5%. For this amount of loss, the net effect on the 
D 
values will be <3; on the 
18O values it will be <0.5. It should also be noted that this 
shift and any shift caused by #2 above would offset each other. 
6.3.4.3 DST Mineralogic and Petrologic Analyses 
Mineralogic characterization data provide quantitative information on mineral distribution and 
abundance in the pre-heating rock under ambient conditions. Mineralogic changes while the test 
is in process are also documented. These data support the coupled thermal-hydrologic-chemical 
modeling effort. 
Expectedly, detectable mineralogic changes from the test were restricted to the natural fracture 
system and the surfaces of pre-heating boreholes that function as preferential fluid-flow paths. 
Mineralogic changes within the rock matrix were expected to be undetectably minute. These 
expectations were supported by qualitative examination of the SHT post-cooling overcores (see 
Section 6.2.4.2) and by quantitative X-ray diffraction (XRD) of pre- and post-testing crushed 
TSw2 samples from a hydrothermal column test (Lowry 2001 [157900], p. 29). These studies 
found no detectable mineralogic alteration of the rock matrix at the conclusion of the 
hydrothermal tests. Evidence of mineralogic alteration was limited to fractures and borehole 
surfaces of the SHT and to crushed-tuff fragment surfaces from the column test. 
Mineralogic characterization of the natural rock-fracture surfaces was accomplished by study of 
pre-heating drill core from the DST block. A decision was made to employ stereoscopic 
examination of fracture surfaces, supplemented by scanning electron microscope (SEM) and 
XRD, for mineralogic analysis, so as to characterize as much fracture surface as possible. 
Compared to the exclusive use of microanalytical techniques, this strategy sacrifices achievable 
precision and accuracy, but maximizes the representativeness of the data because more fracture 
surface is examined. The end product is a quantitative mineralogic inventory of the fracture 
system that can be input to modeling. Mineral abundances of stellerite, manganese minerals, 
crystalline silica and feldspar, clay, and calcite on the fracture surfaces are in the TDMS under 
the Input-DTN LA9912SL831151.002 [146449]. 
Investigators learned from the SHT that mineralogic sampling while a test is in progress would 
be more valuable than collecting samples only after the test is finished. To realize this goal for 
the DST, a sidewall-sampling tool was designed and built to provide an in-progress sampling

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-51 September 2002 
capability. The tool operates within existing boreholes, targeting intervals of fractured rock that 
were identified from borehole video recordings. Two coring sessions have been conducted 
during the transition from heating to cooling phases of the test. 
In November 2000, the sidewall coring tool was used to collect six sidewall cores from inclined 
boreholes ESF-HD-CHE-2 and ESF-HD-CHE-3 (boreholes 53 and 54 in Figure 6.3-7). In June 
2001, eight samples were collected from the two previously sampled boreholes plus borehole 
ESF-HD-CHE-9 (borehole 59 in Figure 6.3-7). The sidewall cores from these boreholes have 
provided information on mineralogic changes in the boiling zone. The elemental abundances and 
chemical, textural, and mineralogic characteristics of core samples from borehole 54 are in the 
TDMS under the Input-DTN LA0201SL831225.001 [158426]. 
6.3.4.3.1 Results: Mineralogy of the Pre-Heating Natural Fracture System 
Systematic data on natural, pre-heating fracture-mineral coverage were collected from the drill 
core of borehole ESF-HD-TEMP-2 (borehole 80 in Figure 6.3-3), a horizontal borehole that runs 
parallel to the Heated Drift. The drill core is 195.6 ft (59.62 m) long, but the first 25 ft (7.62 m) 
of the core are well outside the Heated Drift and were excluded from study. The number of 
fractures in the relevant length of core was too large for all to be included in the characterization. 
Therefore, a conceptual model of fracture attributes was developed to guide the selection of a 
subset of fractures for mineralogic analysis. The conceptual model is based on a major 
simplification of the criteria used to define subzones of the middle nonlithophysal zone (Buesch 
and Spengler 1998 [101433], pp. 18, 20). 
The rock traversed by ESF-HD-TEMP-2 consists of intervals dominated by vapor-phase features 
and intervals where vapor-phase features are not prominent. As seen in the drill core, the 
dominant vapor-phase features are vapor-phase partings and vapor-phase stringers that dip 
eastward at low angles parallel to the rock foliation. Both partings and stringers are fractures 
lined with crystalline silica and feldspar fracture coatings, commonly called vapor-phase 
minerals. In intervals where vapor-phase partings and stringers and associated vapor-phase 
cavities (lithophysae) are common, the rock-matrix color is light brownish gray. Rock-matrix 
color in the intervals with only rare vapor-phase features is grayish orange pink to light brown. 
Reconnaissance examination of the drill core suggested that the fracture coatings are different in 
the vapor-phase and nonvapor-phase intervals, an observation that was confirmed by detailed 
study. Based on this observation, detailed fracture-mineral studies were performed in two core 
sections of approximately equal length representing each type of interval. Mineral abundances on 
the fracture surfaces were determined for stellerite, manganese minerals, crystalline silica and 
feldspar (combined), clay (probably also including minor mordenite), and calcite. The results are 
presented in Table 6.3.4.3-1. For the minerals included in the inventory, differences in 
abundance of crystalline silica plus feldspar, and in calcite between the vapor-phase and 
nonvapor-phase intervals, were documented. The greater abundance of crystalline silica plus 
feldspar in the vapor-phase interval is expected because these minerals are among the defining 
characteristics of vapor-phase void spaces.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-52 September 2002 
Additional natural minerals observed in very small quantities or in local concentrations by SEM 
of pre-heating core include mordenite, pyrite, and possible hematite. Other minerals are also 
present and will be characterized based on their importance for modeling the test results. 
6.3.4.3.2 Results: Evidence of Mineral Deposition 
Sidewall cores collected during the test revealed new mineral deposits on borehole surfaces and 
on the surfaces of fractures that intersect the boreholes. New mineral deposits are common on the 
borehole surfaces because the boreholes act as preferential pathways for fluid flow. Deposits are 
less common and quantities of new minerals less abundant on the natural fractures within the 
core samples. 
Mineral deposition within the boiling zone is documented by samples from borehole ESF-HDCHE-
3 (borehole 54). The three products observed so far are tentatively identified as amorphous 
silica, gypsum, and calcite (DTN LA0201SL831225.001 [158426]). The tentative identifications 
of gypsum and calcite are based on identifications of these phases by XRD as products of the 
SHT (DTN LA0009SL831151.001 [153485]). The silica deposits exhibit considerable textural 
heterogeneity, perhaps because some were deposited when the collection site was in the 
condensation zone and others deposited when boiling-zone dryout conditions were reached. 
Examples of possible condensation zone silica deposition above the Heated Drift have been 
identified. In one example, a fracture surface is completely coated by terrace-like silica deposits 
up to a few micrometers thick. In another example, several discoid silica deposits (up to about 20 
micrometers across) rest on a surface of earlier-deposited discs cemented and largely obscured 
by silica particles about one or two micrometers across. In both examples, the deposits were built 
up during multiple episodes of silica deposition, perhaps during the passage of numerous pulses 
of silica-saturated water. 
Very thin (less than 0.5 micrometer thick), curled silica sheets may be products of final dryout in 
the boiling zone. There is no textural evidence of successive buildup in the silica sheets. Also 
lying atop the earlier silica deposits or on pre-heating fracture surfaces are scattered deposits of 
prismatic gypsum and rounded mounds of calcite. 
6.3.4.3.3 Results: Evidence of Mineral Dissolution 
Studies of pre-heating core from the SHT showed that some of the natural fracture minerals have 
experienced dissolution caused by ancient or ongoing geochemical processes. This complicates 
the effort to document mineral dissolution resulting specifically from the DST. To provide 
documentation of natural alteration, samples of pre-heating drill core from approximately the 
same locations as sidewall samples were examined by SEM. Images of the typical morphologies 
of natural fracture-coating minerals and rock-fracture surfaces were recorded. The majority of 
such documentation was devoted to stellerite because it is the single most abundant fracturecoating 
mineral. 
The natural stellerite fracture coatings in pre-heating samples did not show clear evidence of 
dissolution. Stellerite in the sidewall core samples also showed no evidence of dissolution. The 
lone exception occured on one fracture from the 66.5-ft (20.27-m) depth in borehole ESF-HDCHE-
3. In this location, a highly corroded stellerite crystal, several slightly to moderately

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-53 September 2002 
corroded stellerite crystals, and a moderately corroded silica crystal were adjacent to or within a 
lobate deposit of amorphous silica (DTN LA0201SL831225.001 [158426]). At the time of 
sample collection, this sample came from within the boiling zone. However, the sampled rock 
volume had previously been within the condensation zone before the boiling zone moved to its 
farthest position away from the heaters. It is possible that the observed mineral dissolution and, 
perhaps, deposition, occurred when the rock volume was in the condensation zone. 
6.3.4.3.4 Measurement Uncertainty: Mineralogic and Petrologic Analyses 
Estimates of fracture coverage by minerals are the principal numerical data derived from these 
studies. No formal analysis of the errors of estimation has been performed. It is likely that 
mineral coverages estimated to be 10% or less have relative errors of 50100% (e.g., the 
estimated 2% coverage by a mineral could be in the 13% range). Estimated mineral coverages 
greater than 10% probably have estimated relative errors of 20% or less. Uncertainties of these 
magnitudes are considered adequate for current modeling purposes. 
6.3.4.4 Strontium and Uranium in Water Samples 
This section discusses strontium and uranium isotopic data obtained from a subset of water 
samples collected from the DST during the heating phase (Section 6.3.4.1). Measurements of 
strontium and uranium concentrations and isotopic compositions in water samples may provide 
information on mineral reactions and water flow paths occurring as the block is heated during the 
test. In addition, isotopic analyses can provide unequivocal evidence of interaction of testproduced 
water with the engineered materials introduced into the test block during construction. 
This section discusses data obtained from waters sampled from five boreholes: 60, 186, 59, 76, 
and 80. Data were acquired at the USGS in Denver under Technical Procedures NWM-USGSGCP-
03 and NWM-USGS-GCP-12. Uranium and strontium concentrations were determined by 
isotope dilution mass spectrometry. Uranium and strontium isotopic ratios were determined by 
thermal-ionization mass spectrometry. The data have been submitted to the TDMS under two 
Input-DTNs: GS011108312322.008 [159136] and GS011108312322.009 [159137]. 
6.3.4.4.1 Results: Strontium and Uranium in Water Samples 
Figure 6.3.4.4-1 shows uranium concentrations and 234U/238U activity ratios in DST waters, as 
well as values obtained for pore water from upper lithophysal and middle nonlithophysal units of 
the Topopah Spring Tuff (Tptp) and values for water perched in the base of the Tptp. Uranium 
concentrations in DST samples vary from 0.003 to 0.65 g/L and are typically lower than 
concentrations observed in pore water extracted by ultracentrifugation from the same units. The 
234U/238U activity ratios (AR) in DST samples vary from 1.14 to 5.68, and unlike U 
concentrations, typically overlap the 234U/238U AR values observed in pore water. Samples from 
individual DST sites obtained at different times during the heating phase of the test have uranium 
concentrations that show a fairly systematic decrease with time (Figure 6.3.4.4-2). Zone 60-3 
water shows a 10-fold decrease in U concentration between 6/4/98 and 5/25/99 to a value of 0.01 
g/L. Zone 59-3 water shows an even greater decrease from 0.015 to 0.0003 g/L. Temporal 
changes in 234U/238U are not as systematic. Zone 60-3 water decreases significantly from values 
of 3.6 to 4.1 in 1998, to a value of 1.4 in May 1999. In contrast, the sample collected from 
borehole 80 in October 1999 has substantially higher 234U/238U AR than samples collected in

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-54 September 2002 
April of the same year. Samples from 59-2 collected between October 1999 and January 2001 
show nearly constant 234U/238U AR. 
The general trends of decreasing U concentration with time are consistent with increasing 
proportions of condensate mixed in with pore water that was mobilized during the DST heating 
phase. The wide range in U concentrations observed in Tptp pore waters makes it difficult to 
estimate the amount of condensate added; however, all but two samples with U concentrations 
>0.15 g/L appear to contain at least some condensate. Samples with U concentrations <0.01 
g/L probably consist of more than 90% condensate. Even though these samples are particularly 
susceptible to contamination, most still have 234U/238U AR within the range of observed 
porewater. Only four DST samples have 234U/238U AR outside the expected range. Water from 
60-3 collected on 5/25/99 has a low U concentration as well as a 234U/238U AR of 1.425. 
Contamination with rock or anthropogenic material is likely to add U with a 234U/238U AR near 
secular equilibrium value of 1.0. This same sample also shows evidence of contamination of 
strontium (see below). In addition, three samples collected at different distances in borehole 80 
on April 20, 1999, have 234U/238U AR between 1.14 and 1.24. The 234U/238U AR for these three 
samples is substantially lower than the 2.70 value obtained from a sample from the same 
borehole collected 10/27/99. Although it is not clear if the latter sample is devoid of all 
contamination, the material causing the anomalously low 234U/238U values in the 4/20/99 
sampling was largely eliminated from the later sample. 
Similar to uranium, the strontium concentrations in the test waters approach the values estimated 
for pore water and decrease with time. Borehole 60-3 water reached a strontium concentration of 
0.2 g/L in June 1999, about 1,000 times less strontium than this zone produced initially. Figure 
6.3.4.4-3 shows the variation of strontium isotopic compositions in the test waters compared to 
various reservoirs of strontium in the DST block. The orange and red bands show the strontium 
isotopic compositions of the Topopah Spring Tuff (middle nonlithophysal and upper lithophysal 
zones) today and at the time of their deposition, respectively. The green band is the range of 
87Sr/86Sr in pore water; these data are from borehole USW SD-9, which is the closest vertical 
borehole to the DST block. Grout introduced into the DST block during emplacement of 
borehole instrumentation has also been measured and is shown by the black line at an 87Sr/86Sr 
value of 0.7086. The grout contains over 800 ppm strontium, providing a potentially important 
added source. 
Most of the water obtained during the DST to date has 87Sr/86Sr values within the range of pore 
water. A very dilute sample obtained from borehole 60-3 falls outside the range of pore water. 
The most significant deviations from pore water are exhibited by water from borehole 80. These 
samples, obtained from this neutron borehole, apparently have interacted with the grout used to 
emplace the liner in this borehole. This statement is conclusive evidence of contamination based 
on the known isotopic compositions of the grout and the natural system; the chemistry of these 
samples should be used only as an example of water that has interacted with the engineered 
materials. It is notable that the chemistry of these waters does not show additional evidence of 
interaction with grout. Further studies of the sampling materials may be warranted for 
verification that the contamination occurred in situ rather than during sampling. 
Borehole 59, zone 4 was sampled in November 1998 and showed a very unusual chemistry, as 
reported in Table 6.3.4.1-2 (approximately 1,200 mg/L chloride) that was initially interpreted as

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-55 September 2002 
probable contamination. This sample was analyzed for strontium isotopic composition, and the 
result plots in the field of pore water (Figure 6.3.4.4-3). Similarly, the 234U/238U AR for this 
sample is in the range of observed porewaters and higher than other samples from borehole 59 
(Figure 6.3.4.4-1) unlike samples with low 234U/238U suspected of contamination. Based on these 
results, the 59-4 sample is not likely contaminated with grout or other anthropogenic materials. 
Rather, this sample may represent pore water that has become isolated and evaporated either 
through natural processes or enhanced by the heat during the test. This is a potentially important 
sample because it exhibits high sulfate and fluoride and thus could be more corrosive to 
engineered materials than more typical pore water or condensate-pore water mixtures. 
6.3.4.4.2 Measurement Uncertainty: Strontium and Uranium in Water Samples 
The accuracy of the isotopic dilution concentration measurements is maintained within the 
analytical precision by the analysis of known concentration standards; the precision of strontium 
concentrations is about 1% and the precision of uranium concentrations varies from less than 1% 
to about 10%, depending on the amount of uranium present. The accuracy of the isotopic 
measurements is maintained by the frequent analysis of standards with known or assumed 
isotopic compositions. For uranium, this standard is a material in which the isotopes are in 
secular equilibrium. For strontium, a standard with a ratio equivalent to modern seawater is 
analyzed; all 87Sr/86Sr ratios are relative to a value of 0.70920 for modern seawater. Absolute 
precisions at 95% confidence are 0.00005 for 87Sr/86Sr and from 0.02 to 0.3 for 234U/238U. 
6.3.4.5 Investigation of Waters with High Fluoride Concentrations 
Certain water samples acquired from superheated (>140oC) zones within DST hydrological 
boreholes (see Table 6.3.4.1-2) show relatively high fluoride concentrations (974 ppm) and low 
pH (3.13.5) values relative to background values (sub-ppm fluoride and pH greater than 4.5). In 
these high-temperature regions of the rock, water is present as superheated vapor onlyliquid 
water is formed during the sampling process by cooling. The compositions of these condensed 
steam samples show near-stoichiometric balance of hydrogen and fluoride ions, suggesting 
dissolution of hydrogen fluoride (HF) gas into the aqueous phase. Since HF can be corrosive, it 
could have deleterious effects on the performance of the waste package if it originated from the 
rock. If the source of the HF is from introduced materials, the source can be eliminated through 
use of alternative materials. Field and multiple laboratory tests were initiated to identify the 
source of the HF gas in the DST. 
Several water samples were collected in the DST to determine whether the HF results from the 
degradation of materials originally introduced to facilitate measurements, or whether the HF 
could have been derived from fluoride-bearing minerals in the host rock. The materials 
introduced in this test include fluoroelastomer (abbreviated FKM) synthetic rubber 
manufactured by Seaquest Rubber company (similar in composition to Viton. manufactured by 
DuPont) and Teflon.. The fluoroelastomer was used in making pneumatic packers to isolate test 
zones, while the Teflon. tubing was used to draw water and steam from the test zones. 
Analyses of water samples taken both before and after the introduction of materials to a 
previously clean borehole in the DST demonstrate clearly that the source of the fluoride is the 
introduced materials. Data from the field tests were submitted to the TDMS with the following

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-56 September 2002 
Input-DTNs: SN0203F3903102.001 [159133] and LL020405123142.019 [159307]. More 
detailed discussion of this investigation has been documented in a white paper (YMP 2002 
[158176]). 
6.3.4.5.1 Background 
One important objective of the DST was to acquire and study samples of water from the 
hydrology boreholes over time. Condensed steam samples, however, were never the focus of 
chemical analysis because they do not represent water within the rock. Rather, such samples 
condensed in the sampling tube as relatively dilute water, with some dissolved CO2 yielding pH 
in the 4-6 range. In general, the condensed steam samples contain very low dissolved solids, 
indicating minimal reaction of water with minerals present in the rock. A fringe of mobilized 
pore water, which provided almost all of the high-temperature water samples in the early stages 
of the DST, was driven ahead of the expanding dry-out zone around the Heated Drift and the 
wing heaters. Once the dry-out zone passed the boreholes, however, the only moisture present in 
the above-boiling rock regions was water vapor (steam) passing through the fracture system. The 
condensed vapor samples, drawn from sampling intervals of the hydrology boreholes that 
reached or exceeded temperatures about 40 above the boiling temperature, showed lower pH 
and higher dissolved solids. The chemical compositions of these condensed steam samples are 
not characteristic of the slightly carbonated water condensed from steam in some of the lowertemperature 
(but still above boiling) boreholes. 
As shown in Figure 6.3.4.5-1, the hottest hydrologic boreholes (60, 77, and 186) in the DST were 
drilled from the Observation Drift to a length of about 40 m to pass under the Heated Drift. 
These boreholes slope downward, passing within a meter of the wing-heater boreholes, finally 
terminating below and beyond the Heated Drift. The hydrologic boreholes required the use of 
pneumatic packers, to isolate test zones and multiple Teflon. tubes that passed through the 
packers, allowing access to accumulated water or steam. The packers in these boreholes were 
made of fluoroelastomer synthetic rubber manufactured by the Seaquest Rubber Company from 
unvulcanized raw materials provided by Burton Rubber Processing, Inc. Fluoroelastomer was 
chosen as the most suitable packer material because it was reported by the manufacturer to 
withstand temperatures up to 200C. 
6.3.4.5.2 Field Testing Strategy 
Recognizing that water samples acquired from superheated (>140C) zones within hydrological 
boreholes of the DST show relatively high fluoride concentrations (974 ppm) and low pH (3.1 
3.5) values, the Thermal Test Team devised an appropriate strategy to resolve the question as to 
the origin of the HF contamination. The planned field investigations would test two competing 
hypotheses: (1) that the source of the fluoride in the samples is introduced materials, or (2) that 
the source is the host rock itself. The proposed plan was to remove the potential source of 
contamination (the packer material) from boreholes 60 and 77 and introduce the suspected 
contaminants into relatively clean test zones. Sampling of the boreholes would have to be done 
before the introduction of the materials to characterize the uncontaminated system, and then after 
the materials were introduced to see if a high fluoride signal was generated.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-57 September 2002 
The best candidate boreholes for introducing the potential source of contamination (packer 
materials) were considered to be in arrays adjacent to the hydrology borehole arrays and to be 
intersecting essentially the same temperature field. For this reason, boreholes 72 and 55, both 
from the FLUTe.-instrumented (a.k.a. SEAMIST) chemical arrays, were selected. These 
boreholes were nearly parallel to 77 and 60, respectively, and they were in close proximity to 
wing heaters (Figure 6.3.4.5-1). Details of the FLUTe. system are provided in Section 6.3.4.1. 
Except for a few chips of silicon rubber liner, the FLUTe. system from borehole 72 was 
extracted in spring of 2001 to allow for sidewall drilling operations. What materials remained 
were pushed to the bottom of the borehole by the sidewall drill bit. 
6.3.4.5.3 Experimental Methods 
The HF field experiment included characterizing boreholes 55 and 72 to locate accessible sample 
collection zones with temperatures above 140oC, while allowing enough vapor to be drawn and 
condensed as sufficient water samples for analyses. On November 8, 2001, borehole 72 was 
characterized using a thermocouple and Tygon. sampling tube clamped to a 6 ft length of 
titanium pipe to form a probe. Beginning from the collar, temperatures were recorded at 6 ft 
intervals. The temperature along borehole 72 were found to be comparable with those measured 
in borehole 60. Borehole 72 also produced abundant water vapor within the elevated temperature 
zone. This characterization confirmed that borehole 72 was a good candidate for further 
experimentation. The hottest zone, with temperatures above 170oC, was found to be in the 7884 
ft depth interval. As the probe was positioned there, a 50 mL sample of condensed steam was 
collected through the Tygon. tubing in about 25 minutes. Previously, on June 28, 2001, a 
similar method had been used to collect a sample from borehole 72, although no direct 
temperature measurements had been taken within the borehole. Analytical results of condensed 
steam samples collected from this borehole are discussed below and included in Table 6.3.4.5-1. 
Characterization of borehole 55 encountered several setbacks, including blockage of the 
temperature probe from torn FLUTe. liner, temperatures along the boreholes not exceeding the 
desired 140C, and difficulty in obtaining water condensate from the borehole. For these 
reasons, the decision was made to use borehole 55 only as a control interval. All sampling of 
borehole 55 was in parallel with that conducted in borehole 72, and all samples were submitted 
for laboratory analyses. 
After the initial field survey to establish background values of F-content, the next activity was 
preparation of the apparatus used to introduce fluoroelastomer and Teflon.-bearing samples into 
borehole 72. An apparatus was developed that employed a rigid push rod to position a Teflon. 
sampling tube and various fluoroelastomer samples at a predetermined depth in the highest 
temperature zone. Threaded rods, couplings, and 16-gage wire milled from C276 alloy were 
procured. Alloy C276 was chosen because it is less reactive to corrosive environments relative to 
other metals and would be much less likely to attenuate any HF signal that developed, as might 
occur with the use of conventional stainless steel or titanium. The various fluoroelastomer 
samples are: (1) aged fluoroelastomer sections cut from a borehole 60 packer, following the 
removal of the entire packer assembly from borehole 60; (2) sections from an unused SHT 
packer; and (3) test batch sections of fluoroelastomer (obtained prior to the full production run 
for the DST). These were wired to a 12 ft long section of C276 alloy push rod.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-58 September 2002 
Before the fluoroelastomer sample string was installed, a baseline water sample was acquired 
from borehole 72 by means of a Teflon. sampling tube. Then field measurements were 
performed on the water sample to quantify pH, temperature, and electrical conductivity (EC). 
The push rods and sampling tube were then removed in preparation for installation of the 
fluoroelastomer sample string. The sampling string was installed in borehole 72 along with six 
additional 12 ft C276 alloy rods. The sampling port was located at a depth of 23.8 m. Two 
mechanical borehole plugs were installed at the borehole collar to reduce the exchange of air 
with the DST Observation Drift. 
For sampling in borehole 55, a 0.375-inch O.D. C276 alloy steel tube was employed. The end of 
the tube, or sampling port, was located at a depth of 71.75 ft. A pump was connected to steel 
alloy tubing at the collar that drew only 20 mL of water in about 2 hours. Field measurements of 
pH, temperature, and conductivity were also obtained. Three days following the first sampling, 
on November 29, 2001, samples were again collected from both boreholes. It only took about 10 
minutes to flush the line in borehole 72 with 100 mL of condensed water. This borehole 
continued to produce abundant sample. Field measurements were performed on the 100 mL 
sample, and the equipment was moved to borehole 55. In this borehole, once again, the rate of 
water collection was extremely slow. Only a 13 mL sample was collected after 3 hours of 
pumping. More samples were collected on December 5, 2001, with a similar outcome. Borehole 
72 produced 500 mL of water in less than an hour, while borehole 55 remained comparatively 
dry. Final samples were collected on January 9, 2002, before the removal of the sampling string 
from borehole 72. 
6.3.4.5.4 Results: Fluoride Contents of Condensates 
The components of focus from this field study are those parameters collected in the field that are 
indicative of high fluoride concentrations (e.g., pH, and electrical conductivity/total dissolved 
solids) and the fluoride concentration measured by ion chromatography (IC) in the laboratory. 
Field parameters were obtained for each sample with sufficient sample volume (>10 mL). Values 
reported for pH, and electrical conductivity (EC)/total dissolved solids (TDS) are those measured 
at the temperature of sample collection (ranging from 20 to 50.C) and documented in sample 
collection summaries. 
The summary of field (pH, TDS, EC) and laboratory analyses (fluoride) for borehole 72 and 
borehole 55 (control samples) are compiled in Table 6.3.4.5-1. Additional data for borehole 72 
(collection dates: 06/28/01 and 11/8/01) and borehole 55 (collection dates: 11/15/01 and 
11/21/01) are provided from sampling activities that predate the HF field study. 
6.3.4.5.5 Conclusion 
Analytical results from the first attempt at characterization of borehole 55 on 11/15/01 and again 
on 11/21/01 strongly suggest that the test zone was contaminated with the FLUTe. still 
remaining in the borehole. The water collected from borehole 55 at this time shows elevated 
concentrations of chloride and sulfate, suggesting contamination by small amounts of various 
salts left in the FLUTe.. Similar high chloride and sulfate values have not been observed in any 
of the other HF-contaminated boreholes. The small sample volumes collected during both 
pre-test events made it difficult to thoroughly flush the Tygon. tubing, undoubtedly contributing

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-59 September 2002 
to the chances of field contamination and measurement uncertainty. The baseline sample 
recorded on 11/26/02 was relatively clean, so borehole 55 offered a viable test zone from which 
to collect control samples. 
The evidence that the introduced materials are responsible for the HF in the DST includes the 
following observations. Water samples collected from borehole 72 at high temperatures 
(~170C) prior to introduction of any fluoroelastomer or Teflon. show pH values in the range 
4.8 to 5.5 and fluoride concentrations well below 1 ppm over a period of six months. These 
characteristics are typical of condensing DST steam that contains only some dissolved carbon 
dioxide generated by water-mineral-gas reactions in the rock. In addition, the low fluoride 
content of these fluids is similar to background values found for lower-temperature samples 
collected throughout the duration of the DST. After the introduction of the fluoroelastomer 
packer materials and Teflon. sampling tube in borehole 72 on November 26, 2001, however, 
the pH of the water samples dropped to 3.8 and fluoride rose to 2.4 ppm within three days. Nine 
days after introduction of the fluoroelastomer and Teflon. in BH72, fluoride concentrations 
reached as high as 7.6 ppm for a sample with a pH of 3.4. 
Laboratory tests were implemented to provide confirmation of the results of the field test and, if 
possible, to determine which of the introduced materials was responsible for the HF in the DST. 
Results from this investigation will be presented in a revision to this report. 
In summary, the results of the field test confirm the hypothesis that the source of the elevated 
fluoride and low pH in high-temperature (>140C) samples from the DST is the introduced test 
materials. 
6.3.5 DST Miscellaneous Measurements 
This section discusses additional DST measurements not covered in the prior four DST sections. 
Specifically, fracture mapping and borehole video logging are discussed. Detailed discussion of 
these measurements is documented in the report entitled Ambient Characterization of the Drift 
Scale Test Block (CRWMS M&O 1997 [101539]). Input-DTNs and Output-DTNs are listed in 
Tables 4-3 and 6.3-1, respectively. 
6.3.5.1 Fracture Mapping 
The objective of geologic mapping in the DST block was to determine the vertical and horizontal 
variability of fracture networks and lithophysal zones and to identify values for parameters to be 
used for rock-mass classification. 
Mapping was done essentially to the same standards used in the ESF Main Drift, using technical 
procedure NWM-USGS-G-32 (see DTN: GS970608314224.006 [158429]). From these 
procedures, the USGS/USBR used full-periphery mapping techniques and detailed line surveys 
(DLSs) to characterize the rock and fractures in the DST area. 
6.3.5.1.1 Results: Fracture Mapping 
Full-periphery geotechnical maps for the DST Connecting Drift are presented in Figures 7-1 
through 7-3, and Figures 7-4 through 7-6 for the DST Heated Drift in the Ambient

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-60 September 2002 
Characterization of the Drift Scale Test Block Report (CRWMS M&O 1997 [101539]). The 
lithology of the unit consists of densely welded, devitrified tuff of rhyolitic composition, 
containing vapor-phase minerals and about 1% phenochrysts, chiefly feldspar and biotite. Matrix 
colors are a variable mixture of reddish purple (5RP5/2) or pale red (5R4/2) and light brown 
(5YR5/6) with wisps of very light gray (N8). Pumice (less than 5%) is mostly less than 20 mm, 
spherulitic, and grayish brown (5YR3/2) to very light gray (N8). Volcanic lithics (12%) are 
light gray (N8), less than 10 mm in size, and locally have very light gray (N8) rims. Lithophysae 
are rare (less than 1%) and range in size up to 80 mm, with vapor-phase minerals and very light 
gray (N8) rims and spots. Short (1020 cm), discontinuous, subhorizontal vapor phase partings 
are present throughout the unit, while the more developed subhorizontal partings from beddingplane 
features are on the order of meters apart. 
6.3.5.1.2 Measurement Uncertainty: Fracture Mapping 
Uncertainty associated with DST fracture mapping is similar to that discussed in Section 
6.1.4.1.2. 
6.3.5.2 Borehole Video Logging 
The objective of borehole video logs was to provide descriptive visual information from 
boreholes in the DST block and to supplement other available characterization data. Borehole 
video logs were also used to help select appropriate depths for packer settings for airpermeability 
testing. 
6.3.5.2.1 Results: Borehole Video Logging 
Borehole video logs provide much visual information regarding fractures, including aperture 
size, fracture frequency, and fracture orientation. Videos can be acquired by referring to the 
Input-DTN cited in Table 4-3 (DTN: LARO831422AQ97.002 [158431]). 
6.3.5.2.2 Measurement Uncertainty: Borehole Video Logging 
These observations are inherently subjective, which results in unquantifiable uncertainty. Also, 
determination of orientation and location of the video monitor may be flawed. 
6.3.5.3 Waste Package Materials 
Coupons of candidate waste package materials (at the time the DST heating phase was started) 
were placed at strategic locations such as hot/dry locations near heaters and warm/wet regions in 
the condensation zones in hydrological boreholes and in the heated drift. These coupons 
consisted of one of three materials (Alloy-22, carbon steel, and Monel-400). The coupons were 
tested before the heating phase and will be tested after the cooling phase to evaluate their 
corrosion potential. Also included in the hydrological boreholes were concrete samples which 
are not considered waste package materials. Slight corrosion is anticipated in these waste 
package materials during the DST. 
Discussions of these non-qualified corrosion measurements of waste package materials are 
included in this report for completeness.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-61 September 2002 
6.3.5.4 Microbiological Investigations 
The potential significance of the microbial activity on the chemical evolution of a radioactive 
waste repository, waste package lifetime, and radionuclide transport are not understood well 
enough to determine their significance. The purpose of including the microbial experiments in 
the DST is to obtain complex process level information about survival and migration of microbes 
in an environment analogous to a radioactive waste repository. It is considered advantageous to 
evaluate microbiological response in terms of thermal, hydrological, mechanical and chemical 
behavior. With the goal of understanding the significance of microbial survival and migration in 
this geological repository environment, the following tests were designed: 
1. Survival/migration test: borehole emplacement of labeled microbes 
2. Survival/migration test: heated drift emplacement of labeled microbes 
3. Survival/material-microbe-rock interaction test: carbon steel-microbe-rock and carbon 
steel-microbe-concrete 
4. Sterile collection and freezing of pre-heating rock sample. 
All tests were conducted with microbes that are indistinguishable from the microbes that are 
present in the rock surrounding the DST block. A non-altering label was added to the microbes 
that acts as a tracking device to monitor their progress. The microbes are not pathogenic and 
have been collected and isolated for the Yucca Mountain Project during the excavation of the 
ESF. 
The total number of microbes that have been installed are far less than the number of microbes 
that have been unintentionally introduced during the construction of the DST. Locations of 
installation points include the heated drift and select borehole locations. 
For completeness, discussions of these non-qualified measurements of microbial behavior are 
included in this report.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 6.3-62 September 2002 
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.3-1 September 2002 
Figure 6.3-1. DST As-Built Plan View with Two-Dimensional Coordinates of Key Locations

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.3-2 September 2002 
Figure 6.3-2. Perspective View Showing Drifts and Boreholes of the DST

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.3-3 September 2002 
Figure 6.3-3. Perspective View Showing Temperature (RTD) Boreholes of the DST

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.3-4 September 2002 
Figure 6.3-4. Perspective View Showing Hydrology Boreholes of the DST

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.3-5 September 2002 
Figure 6.3-5. Perspective View Showing Mechanical (MPBX) Boreholes of the DST

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.3-6 September 2002 
Figure 6.3-6. Perspective View Showing Neutron GPR Boreholes of the DST

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.3-7 September 2002 
Figure 6.3-7. Perspective View Showing Chemical (SEAMIST) Boreholes of the DST

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.3-8 September 2002 
Figure 6.3-8. Perspective View Showing ERT Boreholes of the DST

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.3-9 September 2002 
0 
30 
60 
90 
120 
150 
180 
210 
240 
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 
Time (Days) 
Total Power (Kilowatts) 
0
50 
100 
150 
200 
Temperature (oC) 
Dec 3, 1997 
Approx. Thermal Sensor Location 
(Not to Scale) 
Drift Wall Temperature 
Total Power 
Plan View Profile 
OD 
CD 
HD 
. . 
TC-19 
TC-19 
End of the Heating Phase 
Figure 6.3.1.1-1. Total Power and Representative Drift Wall Temperature (TC-19) during the DST 
Heating Phase

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.3-10 September 2002 
-5.0
0 
5.0 
4
7
11 
14 
18 
22 
25 
29 
32 
35 
37 
42 
44 
192-194 
194-196 
196-198 
198-200 
200-202 
202-204 
204-206 
206-208 
208-210 
Temperature (oC) After 1396 Days 
Distance Along Drift Y(m) 
Distance from Roof (m) 
Figure 6.3.1.2-1. Measured Temperature Distribution along the Periphery of the DST Heated Drift Near 
End of DST Heating Phase

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.3-11 September 2002 
0 
50 
100 
150 
200 
250
-20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 
Distance (m) 
Temperature ( oC) 
200 Days 
400 Days 
600 Days 
800 Days 
1000 Days 
1200 Days 
1400 Days 
1503 Days 
Figure 6.3.1.2-2. Temperature Profile along DST Borehole 79 at Select Times 
0 
50 
100 
150 
200 
250
-20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 
Distance (m) 
Temperature (oC) 
200 Days 
400 Days 
600 Days 
800 Days 
1000 Days 
1200 Days 
1400 Days 
1503 Days 
Figure 6.3.1.2-3. Temperature Profile along DST Borehole 80 at Select Times

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.3-12 September 2002 
0 
50 
100 
150 
200 
250 
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 
Time (Days) 
Temperature(oC) 
RTD-1 
RTD-10 
RTD-20 
RTD-30 
RTD-40 
RTD-50 
RTD-60 
Figure 6.3.1.2-4. Temperature Histories for DST Borehole 158 at Selected Locations 
0 
50 
100 
150 
200 
250 
0 5 10 15 20 25 
Distance (m) 
Temperature (oC) 
200 Days 
400 Days 
600 Days 
800 Days 
1000 Days 
1200 Days 
1400 Days 
1503 Days 
Figure 6.3.1.2-5. Temperature Profile along DST Borehole at Select Times

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.3-13 September 2002 
Borehole 164 
0 
50 
100 
150 
200 
250 
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 
Time (Days) 
Temperature (oC) 
RTD-1 
RTD-10 
RTD-20 
RTD-30 
RTD-40 
RTD-50 
RTD-60 
RTD-67 
Figure 6.3.1.2-6. Temperature Histories for DST Borehole 164 at Select Locations 
Borehole 164 
0 
50 
100 
150 
200 
250 
0 5 10 15 20 25 
Distance (m) 
Temperature (oC) 
200 Days 
400 Days 
600 Days 
800 Days 
1000 Days 
1200 Days 
1400 Days 
1503 Days 
Figure 6.3.1.2-7. Temperature Profile along DST Borehole 164 at Select Times

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.3-14 September 2002 
4 years 
3 years 
2 years 
1 year 
RTD Location 
Scale 
meters 
0 5 10 15 
Figure 6.3.1.2-8. Vertical Slice Through the Mid-Length of the DST Heated Drift Showing 95 0C 
Temperature Contours after 1, 2, 3, and 4 Years of Heating
1 year 
2 years 
3 years 
4 years 
0 
meters 
10 5 15 
Scale 
RTD Location 
Figure 6.3.1.2-9. Vertical Slice Through the Longitudinal Axis of the DST Heated Drift Showing 95 0C 
Temperature Contours after 1, 2, 3, and 4 Years of Heating

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.3-15 September 2002 
Figure 6.3.2.1-1. The DST ERT Resistivity Ratios of the 1/10/00 Measurement to the Pre-Heating 
Measurement

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.3-16 September 2002 
Figure 6.3.2.1-2. The DST Saturation Ratio Calculated from the 1/10/00 Resistivity Ratio

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.3-17 September 2002 
Figure 6.3.2.2-1. GPR Difference Velocity Tomograms for DST Borehole Pairs 51-50 and 50-49

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.3-18 September 2002 
-0.16 
-0.14 
-0.12 
-0.1 
-0.08 
-0.06 
-0.04 
-0.02
0 
0.02 
0.04 
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 
Depth from Collar, m 
Difference Fraction Volume Water 
11/19/98 (1 year) 
12/16/99 (2 years) 
11/29/00 (3 years) 
12/11/01 (4 years) 
Figure 6.3.2.3-1. Difference Fraction Volume Water Content Measured in DST Borehole 66 using 
Neutron Logging (November 19, 1998, to December 11, 2001) 
Difference Fraction Volume Water Content

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.3-19 September 2002 
DST Neutron Logging and Temperature 
Measurements From Boreholes 79 and 80 
-2
0
2
4
6
8 
10 
12 
14 
16
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 
Temperature (C) 
Figure 6.3.2.3-2. Rock Moisture Content as a Function of Temperature as Measured from Neutron 
Logging of Boreholes 79 and 80 during the DST Heating Phase

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.3-20 September 2002 
Injection in 185-2 (12-1-99 414 PM) 
0.00 
5.00 
10.00 
15.00 
20.00 
25.00 
3:50:24 PM 4:19:12 PM 4:48:00 PM 5:16:48 PM 5:45:36 PM 6:14:24 PM 
Time 
.P (kPa) 
0.00 
20.00 
40.00 
60.00 
80.00 
100.00 
120.00 
Flow Rate (SLPM) 
185-1 
185-2 
185-3 
185-4 
186-1 
186-2 
186-3 
186-4 
100 SLPM 
NOTE: Much smaller pressure responses are observable in nearby observation intervals. 
Figure 6.3.2.4-1. Air-injection Test in DST Borehole 185-2 Showing Flowrate and Pressure in the 
Injection Zone on 12/1/99

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.3-21 September 2002 
0 
0.5
1 
1.5
2 
2.5 
10/19/97 6/1/98 1/12/99 8/25/99 4/6/00 11/17/00 6/30/01 2/10/02 
Date 
k/kpre-heating 
57-1 
57-2 
57-3 
57-4 
58-1 
58-2 
58-3 
59-1 
59-2 
59-3 
59-4 
60-1 
60-2 
60-3 
60-4 
61-1 
61-2 
61-3 
61-4 
Figure 6.3.2.4-2. Changes In Permeability Displayed as a Ratio to the Pre-Heating Permeability Estimate 
for DST Boreholes 5761

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.3-22 September 2002 
0 
0.2 
0.4 
0.6 
0.8
1 
1.2 
1.4 
1.6 
1.8
2 
10/19/97 6/1/98 1/12/99 8/25/99 4/6/00 11/17/00 6/30/01 2/10/02 
k/kpre-heating 
74-1 
74-2 
74-3 
74-4 
75-1 
75-2 
75-3 
75-4 
76-1 
76-2 
76-3 
76-4 
77-1 
78-1 
78-2 
78-3 
78-4 
Figure 6.3.2.4-3. Changes In Permeability Displayed as a Ratio to the Pre-Heating Permeability Estimate 
for DST Boreholes 7478

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.3-23 September 2002 
0 
0.5
1 
1.5
2 
2.5
3 
3.5 
10/19/97 6/1/98 1/12/99 8/25/99 4/6/00 11/17/00 6/30/01 2/10/02 
k/kpre-heating 
185-1 
185-2 
185-3 
185-4 
186-1 
186-2 
186-3 
186-4 
Figure 6.3.2.4-4. Changes In Permeability Displayed as a Ratio to the Pre-Heating Permeability Estimate 
for DST Boreholes 185186

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.3-24 September 2002 
Injection in 60-3 (4-02-99 353 PM) 
-2.00 
0.00 
2.00 
4.00 
6.00 
8.00 
10.00 
12.00 
14.00 
16.00 
3:21:36 PM 4:19:12 PM 5:16:48 PM 6:14:24 PM 
Time 
.P (kPa) 
0.00 
0.50 
1.00 
1.50 
2.00 
2.50 
3.00 
Flow Rate (SLPM) 
57-1 
57-2 
57-3 
57-4 
58-1 
58-2 
58-3 
59-1 
59-2 
59-3 
59-4 
60-1 
60-2 
60-3 
60-4 
61-1 
61-2 
61-3 
61-4 
10 SLPM 
Figure 6.3.2.4-5. An Injection Test in DST Borehole 60-3 Showing Anomalous Response Attributed to 
Two-Phase Flow Processes on 4/2/99

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.3-25 September 2002 
Injection in 78-4 (4-22-99 348 PM) 
-1.00 
-0.50 
0.00 
0.50 
1.00 
1.50 
2.00 
2.50 
3.00 
3.50 
4.00 
3:21:36 PM 4:19:12 PM 5:16:48 PM 6:14:24 PM 
Time 
.P (kPa) 
0.00 
5.00 
10.00 
15.00 
20.00 
25.00 
Flow Rate (SLPM) 
74-1 
74-2 
74-3 
74-4 
75-1 
75-2 
75-3 
75-4 
76-1 
76-2 
76-3 
76-4 
77-1 
77-2 
77-3 
78-1 
78-2 
78-3 
78-4 
100 SLPM 
NOTE: The reductions in pressure measured in DST Borehole 78-1, 78-2 and 78-3 are attributed 
to effects of cool injection gas being transported in the injection tube for 78-4 through the 
sealed off intervals. 
Figure 6.3.2.4-6. An Anomalous Response to Air Injection into DST Borehole 78-4 during the Heating 
Phase of the DST on 4/22/99

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.3-26 September 2002 
Hole 75 - Temp 
20 
30 
40 
50 
60 
70 
80 
90 
100 
110 
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 
Days since heater activation 
Temperature (C) 
75-TEMP-1 
75-TEMP-2 
75-TEMP-3 
75-TEMP-4 
Figure 6.3.2.4-7. Passive Monitoring Temperature Data for DST Borehole 75 
DST Gas Tracer Test 
Inject 76-2, Withdrawal 75-2 
30:1 Convergent Dipole 
0
5 
10 
15 
20 
25 
30 
4/10/1998 
10:00 
4/10/1998 
10:30 
4/10/1998 
11:00 
4/10/1998 
11:30 
4/10/1998 
12:00 
4/10/1998 
12:30 
4/10/1998 
13:00 
4/10/1998 
13:30 
4/10/1998 
14:00 
4/10/1998 
14:30 
SF6 Conc (ppm) 
0% 
20% 
40% 
60% 
80% 
100% 
120% 
Mass Recovery 
SF6 PPM 
Mass Recovery 
Start Injection 10:12:45 
Stop Injection 11:45:00 
Tracer Breakthrough 10:26 
First Arrival 13 minutes 
Figure 6.3.2.4-8. Mass Breakthrough Curve and Cumulative Mass Recovery for DST Borehole 76-2 from 
30:1 Gas Tracer Test

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.3-27 September 2002 
Figure 6.3.2.5-1. Electrical Resistivity of DST Samples as Function of Saturation in the Drying Cycle at 
50.C

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.3-28 September 2002 
Figure 6.3.2.5-2. The Relative Permittivity of the DST Samples as a Function of Saturation in the 
Drying Cycle at 50.C

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.3-29 September 2002 
Figure 6.3.3.1-1. DST MPBX Layout

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.3-30 September 2002 
Figure 6.3.3.1-2. DST Displacements from Borehole 81 (MPBX1) 
Figure 6.3.3.1-3. DST Displacements from Borehole 154 (MPBX7)

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.3-31 September 2002 
Figure 6.3.3.1-4. DST Displacements from Borehole 155 (MPBX8) 
Figure 6.3.3.1-5. DST Displacements from Borehole 156 (MPBX9)

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.3-32 September 2002 
Figure 6.3.3.1-6. DST Displacements from Borehole 157 (MPBX10) 
Figure 6.3.3.2-1. DST Displacements from CDEX-1 and CDEX-2

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.3-33 September 2002 
Figure 6.3.3.3-1. Layout and Location of DST Strain Gage Rosettes on the Concrete Liner

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.3-34 September 2002 
Figure 6.3.3.3-2. Axial Strains Measured by the Strain Gages on the DST Concrete Liner

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.3-35 September 2002 
Acoustic Emission Activity 
0
5 
10 
15 
20 
25
1/15/99 
4/15/99 
7/15/99 
10/15/99 
1/15/00 
4/15/00 
7/15/00 
10/15/00 
1/15/01 
4/15/01 
7/15/01 
10/15/01 
1/15/02 
Time 
Number of Microseismic Events 
System operation verified via 
hammer blow tests during this 
interval - paucity due to decreased 
signal/noise ratio? 
Figure 6.3.3.4-1 Histogram of DST Microseismic Activity (Acoustic Emission)

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.3-36 September 2002 
Figure 6.3.3.4-2 Location of DST Microseismic Activity (Acoustic Emissions) between January 1, 1999 
and October 15, 2001

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.3-37 September 2002 
Figure 6.3.3.5-1. Strain-Versus-Time Curves for DST Creep Tests of Cast-in-Place Concrete

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.3-38 September 2002 
Bulkhead 
Heated 
Drift 
3m 
7m 
12m
13m 
48m 
Scaling 
Concrete 
Liner 
0.6m2 
1.6m2 
0.7m2 
1.0m2 
Figure 6.3.3.7-1. Locations of Four Scaling Zones in the Roof of the DST Heated Drift 
MPBX-3 
RIDGES FROM ALPINE EXCAVATION 
NOTE: Several distinct ridges along the roof of the Heated Drift appear to coincide with observed scaling 
zones. 
Figure 6.3.3.7-2 View of the DST Prior to Heater Activation

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.3-39 September 2002 
Loose Material at 2.75 m inside the Heated Drift 
Figure 6.3.3.7-3. View of Roof Scaling Located 3 m From the DST Bulkhead and Retained in the Ground 
Support System Comprised of Rock Bolts and Welded Wire Fabric

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.3-40 September 2002 
Figure 6.3.4.1-1. Three Arrays of DST Hydrology Boreholes Showing Relative Packer Positions and 
Fluid Sampling Zones

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.3-41 September 2002 
0 
0
2
4
6
8 
10 
2 4 6 8 10 
Y = 1.159X + 0.095 
R2 = 0.995 
%CO2 (v/v) Li-Cor 
%CO2 (v/v) Columbus Instruments 
Figure 6.3.4.2-1. Comparison of CO2 Concentrations >0.2% Measured with the Li-Cor in the Amundson 
Lab at UC Berkeley and the Columbus Instruments Analyzer at the ESF (January, 
2001)

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.3-42 September 2002 
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 
U concentration, ppb 
234U / 238U activity 
186-3 
59-2 
59-3 
59-4 
60-2 
60-3 
80 
Tptp Pore water 
WT-24 perched 
UZ-14 perched 
NOTE: Analytical errors are typically smaller than the size of the symbols. Pore waters 
and perched waters shown for comparison. 
Figure 6.3.4.4-1. Uranium Concentrations and Isotopic Compositions of Water Samples Collected from 
the DST

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.3-43 September 2002 
0.0001 
0.001 
0.01 
0.1
1
1/5/1998 7/24/1998 2/9/1999 8/28/1999 3/15/2000 10/1/2000 4/19/2001 11/5/2001 
Collection Date 
U concentration, ppb 
186-3 
59-2 
59-3 
59-4 
60-2 
60-3 
80 
1
2
3
4
5
6
1/5/1998 7/24/1998 2/9/1999 8/28/1999 3/15/2000 10/1/2000 4/19/2001 11/5/2001 
Collection Date 
234U / 238U activity 
60-3 
186-3 
59-2 
60-2 
80 
59-3 
59-4 
Figure 6.3.4.4-2 U Concentration (upper) and 234U/238U Activity Ratios (lower) in DST Samples Plotted 
versus Collection Date

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.3-44 September 2002 
NOTE: The calcite field should extend to overlap the pore water field. 
Figure 6.3.4.4-3. Strontium Isotope Ratio Compositions of Water Samples Collected from DST 
Boreholes Compared to Compositions of Pore Water, Rock, Calcite, and Grout

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.3-45 September 2002 
Figure 6.3.4.5-1. Three-Dimensional View of the DST Showing the Hydrology Boreholes (blue) that 
Contain Fluoroelastomer Packers, Wing Heater Boreholes (red), and FLUTe. 
(Chemistry or SEAMIST.) Boreholes (green)

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 F6.3-46 September 2002 
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-1 September 2002 
Table 6.3-1. Output-DTNs along with Input-DTNs for the Drift Scale Test 
Input-DTN [DIRS] Input-DTN 
Description 
Input-DTN 
Text Location Output-DTN Output-DTN 
Description 
MO0002ABBLSLDS.000 
[147304] 
XYZ Coordinates of 
Boreholes and Sensors 
6.3 MO0208RESTRDST.002 Heater Power and 
Temperature Data 
MO9807DSTSET01.000 [113644] Heater, Power, Current, 
Voltage, Temperature: 
November 7, 1997  May 
1998 
6.3.1.1 
6.3.1.2 
MO9810DSTSET02.000 [113662] Heater, Power, Current, 
Voltage, Temperature: June 
1998  August 1998 
6.3.1.1 
6.3.1.2 
MO9906DSTSET03.000 [113673] Heater, Power, Current, 
Voltage, Temperature: 
September 1998  May 
1999 
6.3.1.1 
6.3.1.2 
MO0001SEPDSTPC.000 
[153836] 
Heater, Power, Current, 
Voltage, Temperature: June 
1999  October 1999 
6.3.1.1 
6.3.1.2 
MO0007SEPDSTPC.001 
[153707] 
Heater, Power, Current, 
Voltage, Temperature: 
November 1999  May 
2000 
6.3.1.1 
6.3.1.2 
MO0012SEPDSTPC.002 
[153708] 
Heater, Power, Current, 
Voltage, Temperature: June 
2000  November 2000 
6.3.1.1 
6.3.1.2 
MO0107SEPDSTPC.003 
[158321] 
Heater, Power, Current, 
Voltage, Temperature: 
December 2000  May 
2001 
6.3.1.1 
6.3.1.2 
MO0202SEPDSTTV.001 
[158320] 
Heater, Power, Current, 
Voltage, Temperature: June 
2001  January 14, 2002 
6.3.1.1 
6.3.1.2 
SNL22100196001.006 [158213] Thermal Conductivity as 
Function of Saturation 
6.3.1.3 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
SN0203L2210196.007 [158322] Thermal Expansion Thermal 
Conductivity DST 
Specimens 
6.3.1.3 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
LL980411004244.060 [159107] DST Baseline REKA Probe 
Measurements. 
Temperature 
Measurements using REKA 
Probes: 11/14/97 - 7/31/98. 
6.3.1.4 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
LL980411104244.061 [159111] DST Baseline REKA Probe 
Measurements for Thermal 
Conductivity and Diffusivity. 
VA Supporting Data 
6.3.1.4 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
LL980902104244.070 [159109] DST Baseline REKA Probe 
Measurements for Thermal 
Conductivity and Diffusivity. 
Probe 1 from Borehole 
#153, Probe 2 from 
Borehole #152, Probe 3 
from Hole #151. 
6.3.1.4 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-2 September 2002 
Table 6.3-1. Output-DTNs along with Input-DTNs for the Drift Scale Test (continued) 
Input-DTN [DIRS] Input-DTN 
Description 
Input-DTN 
Text Location Output-DTN Output-DTN 
Description 
UN0106SPA013GD.003 
[159115] 
DST REKA Probe Acquired 
Data for Thermal 
Conductivity and Diffusivity: 
05/01/1998 to 04/30/2001 
6.3.1.4 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
UN0106SPA013GD.004 
[159116] 
DST REKA Probe 
Developed Data for Thermal 
Conductivity and Diffusivity: 
05/01/1998 to 04/30/2001 
6.3.1.4 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
UN0109SPA013GD.005 
[159117] 
DST Rapid Evaluation of K 
and Alpha (REKA) Probe 
Acquired Data for Thermal 
Conductivity and Diffusivity: 
05/01/2001 to 08/31/2001 
6.3.1.4 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
UN0112SPA013GD.006 
[159118] 
DST REKA Probe Acquired 
Data for Thermal 
Conductivity and Diffusivity: 
09/01/2001 to 12/31/2001 
6.3.1.4 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
UN0201SPA013GD.007 
[159119] 
DST REKA Probe 
Developed Data for Thermal 
Conductivity and Diffusivity: 
05/01/2001 to 12/31/2001 
6.3.1.4 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
LL000804023142.009 [158325] Water Saturation 6.3.2.1 LL020801723142.028 ERT Tomograms 
LL980108804244.052 [158332] Electrical Resistivity 6.3.2.1 
LL980406404244.057 [113782] Electrical Resistance 
Tomography 
6.3.2.1 
LL990702704244.099 [113872] Electrical Resistivity 6.3.2.1 
LL980808604244.065 [113791] Electrical Resistance 
Tomography 
6.3.2.1. 
LB990630123142.005 [129274] Ground Penetrating Radar 
Data 
6.3.2.2 
LB000121123142.004 [158338] Ground Penetrating Radar 
Data 
6.3.2.2 
LB000718123142.004 [153354] Ground Penetrating Radar 
Data 
6.3.2.2 
LB0101GPRDST01.001 [158346] Ground Penetrating Radar 
Data 
6.3.2.2 
LB0108GPRDST05.001 [158440] Ground Penetrating Radar 
Data 
6.3.2.2 
LB0208GPRDSTHP.001 GPR Velocity 
Tomograms 
LL020710223142.024 [159551] Neutron Logging 6.3.2.3 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
LB970600123142.001 [105589] Active DST Pre-Heating Air 
Injection, Part 1 of 2 
6.3.2.4 LB0208AIRKDSTH.001 Permeability Data 
LB980120123142.005 [114134] Active DST Pre-Heating Air 
Injection, Part 2 of 2 
6.3.2.4 
LB980120123142.004 [105590] Active Baseline Air 
Injections in Boreholes 57- 
61, 74-78, 185-186 
6.3.2.4

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-3 September 2002 
Table 6.3-1. Output-DTNs along with Input-DTNs for the Drift Scale Test (continued) 
Input-DTN [DIRS] Input-DTN 
Description 
Input-DTN 
Text Location Output-DTN Output-DTN 
Description 
LB980420123142.002 [113706] Active Hydrology Testing for 
Boreholes 57-61, 74-78, 
185-186; Air Injection and 
Gas Tracer Tests 
6.3.2.4 LB0208AIRKDSTH.001 
(continued) 
Permeability Data 
(continued) 
LB980715123142.002 [113742] Active Hydrology Testing 
Data (Air Injection) 
Collected from 12 
Hydrology Boreholes: 
March 1998 to May 1998 
6.3.2.4 
LB981016123142.002 [129245] Active Hydrology Testing for 
Boreholes 57-61, 74-78, 
185-186; Air Injection Tests: 
June 1998 to August 1999 
6.3.2.4 
LB990630123142.001 [129247] Active Hydrology Testing by 
Air Injection: September 
1998 to May 1999 
6.3.2.4 
LB000121123142.002 [158337] Active Hydrology Testing by 
Air Injection: June 1999 to 
October 1999 
6.3.2.4 
LB000718123142.002 [158341] Active Hydrology Testing 
Data (Air Injection) 
Collected from 12 
Hydrology Holes: November 
1, 1999 to May 31, 2000 
6.3.2.4 
LB0101AIRKDST1.001 [158345] Active Hydrology Testing 
Data (Air Injection) 
Collected from 12 
Hydrology Boreholes: June 
1, 2000 to November 30, 
2000 
6.3.2.4 
LB0108AIRKDST5.001 [158438] Active Hydrology Testing 
Data (Air Injection) 
Collected from 12 
Hydrology Boreholes: 
December 1, 2000 to May 
31, 2001 
6.3.2.4 
LB0203AIRKDSTE.001 [158348] Active Hydrology Testing 
Data (Air Injection) 
Collected from 12 
Hydrology Boreholes: June 
1, 2001 to January 2002 
6.3.2.4 
LB980420123142.001 [113696] Passive Monitoring Data for 
Boreholes 57-61, 74-78, 
185-186: Nov 1997 to Feb 
1998 
6.3.2.4 
LB980715123142.001 [113733] Passive Monitoring Data 
Collected from 12 
Hydrology Boreholes: 
March 1998 to May 1998 
6.3.2.4 
LB981016123142.001 [158353] Passive Monitoring Data for 
Boreholes 57-61, 74-78, 
185-186 Taken from June 
1998 to Aug 1998, 3rd 
Quarter 
6.3.2.4 
LB0208H2ODSTHP.001 Passive Hydrological 
Monitoring Data of 
Temperature, Relative 
Humidity and Pressure 
in the Hydrology 
Boreholes

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-4 September 2002 
Table 6.3-1. Output-DTNs along with Input-DTNs for the Drift Scale Test (continued) 
Input-DTN [DIRS] Input-DTN 
Description 
Input-DTN 
Text Location Output-DTN Output-DTN 
Description 
LB990630123142.002 [158355] Passive Monitoring Data 
(Relative Humidity, 
Pressure, Temperature): 
September 1998 to May 
1999 
6.3.2.4 
LB000121123142.001 [158335] Passive Monitoring Data 
(Relative Humidity, 
Pressure, Temperature): 
June 1 through October 31, 
1999 
6.3.2.4 
LB000718123142.001 [158340] Passive Monitoring Data 
Collected from 12 
Hydrology Boreholes Test: 
November 1, 1999 to May 
31, 2000 
6.3.2.4 
LB0101H2ODST01.001 [158347] Passive Monitoring Data 
Collected from 12 
Hydrology Boreholes: June 
1, 2000 to November 30, 
2000 
6.3.2.4 
LB0108H2ODST05.001 [158441] Passive Monitoring Data 
Collected from 12 
Hydrology Boreholes: Dec. 
1, 2000 to May 31, 2001 
6.3.2.4 
LB0203H2ODSTEH.001 
[158351] 
Passive Monitoring Data 
Collected from 12 
Hydrology Boreholes: June 
1, 2001 through end of 
Heating Phase Jan. 14, 
2002 
6.3.2.4 
LB0208H2ODSTHP.001 
(continued) 
Passive Hydrological 
Monitoring Data of 
Temperature, Relative 
Humidity and Pressure 
in the Hydrology 
Boreholes (continued) 
LB980912332245.002 [105593] Gas Tracer Test and 
Estimated Porosity 
6.3.2.4 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
LB970500123142.003 [131500] Laboratory Saturation, 
Porosity, Bulk Density, 
Particle Density, 
Gravimetric Water Content 
Data from Dry Drilled and 
wet drilled Cores in the DST 
and SHT 
6.3.2.5 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
LL970709004244.035 [127312] Laboratory Moisture 
Retention and Porosity 
6.3.2.5 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
LL020502523142.020 [159105] Laboratory Measured 
Electrical Properties of the 
DST Samples as a Function 
of Saturation at 95C 
6.3.2.5 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
LL981109904242.072 [118959] Saturated and Dry Bulk 
Density Permitivity 
6.3.2.5 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
SNF39012298002.002 [159114] Measurements of 
Displacement Data for the 
Drift Scale Test (with results 
from 11/1/1997 through 
5/31/1998) 
6.3.3.1 
6.3.3.2 
Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-5 September 2002 
Table 6.3-1. Output-DTNs along with Input-DTNs for the Drift Scale Test (continued) 
Input-DTN [DIRS] Input-DTN 
Description 
Input-DTN 
Text Location Output-DTN Output-DTN 
Description 
SNF39012298002.006 [158419] MPBX and CDEX 
Displacement June 1998  
August 1998 
6.3.3.1 
6.3.3.2 
SNF39012298002.010 [158367] MPBX and CDEX 
Displacement September 
1998  May 1999 
6.3.3.1 
6.3.3.2 
SN0001F3912298.014 [153841] MPBX and CDEX 
Displacement June 1999  
October 1999 
6.3.3.1 
6.3.3.2 
SN0007F3912298.018 [158374] MPBX and CDEX 
Displacement November 
1999  May 2000 
6.3.3.1 
6.3.3.2 
SN0101F3912298.024 [158400] MPBX and CDEX 
Displacement June 2000  
November 2000 
6.3.3.1 
6.3.3.2 
SN0107F3912298.029 [158408] MPBX and CDEX 
Displacement December 
2000  May 2001 
6.3.3.1 
6.3.3.2 
SN0203F3912298.033 [158361] MPBX and CDEX 
Displacement June 2001  
January 14, 2002 
6.3.3.1 
6.3.3.2 
SNF39012298002.004 [153837] MPBX and CDEX 
Displacement Corrected for 
Thermal Expansion 
November 9 1997  May 
1998 
6.3.3.1 
6.3.3.2 
SNF39012298002.008 [153839] MPBX and CDEX 
Displacement Corrected for 
Thermal Expansion June 
1998  August 1998 
6.3.3.1 
6.3.3.2 
SNF39012298002.012 [153840] MPBX and CDEX 
Displacement Corrected for 
Thermal Expansion 
September 1998  May 
1999 
6.3.3.1 
6.3.3.2 
SN0001F3912298.016 [153842] MPBX and CDEX 
Displacement Corrected for 
Thermal Expansion June 
1999  October 1999 
6.3.3.1 
6.3.3.2 
SN0007F3912298.020 [158388] MPBX and CDEX 
Displacement Corrected for 
Thermal Expansion 
November 1999  May 
2000 
6.3.3.1 
6.3.3.2 
SN0101F3912298.026 [158402] MPBX and CDEX 
Displacement Corrected for 
Thermal Expansion June 
2000  November 2000 
6.3.3.1 
6.3.3.2 
SN0107F3912298.031 [158413] MPBX and CDEX 
Displacement Corrected for 
Thermal Expansion 
December 2000  May 
2001 
6.3.3.1 
6.3.3.2 
SN0207F3912298.037 
and 
SN0208F3912298.039 
Smoothed 
Displacement Data and 
Rock Mass Thermal 
Expansion

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-6 September 2002 
Table 6.3-1. Output-DTNs along with Input-DTNs for the Drift Scale Test (continued) 
Input-DTN [DIRS] Input-DTN 
Description 
Input-DTN 
Text Location Output-DTN Output-DTN 
Description 
SN0203F3912298.035 [158363] MPBX and CDEX 
Displacement Corrected for 
Thermal Expansion June 
2001  January 14, 2002 
6.3.3.1 
6.3.3.2 
SN0207F3912298.037 
and 
SN0208F3912298.039 
(continued) 
Smoothed 
Displacement Data and 
Rock Mass Thermal 
Expansion (continued) 
SNF38040197001.001 [159130] Strain-gage and Anchor 
Locations 
6.3.3.3 Unchanged Unchanged 
SNF39012298002.003 [158417] Ground Support System 
Strain: November 9, 1997  
May 1998 
6.3.3.3 SN0208F3912298.038 Smoothed Strain Data 
SNF39012298002.007 [158365] Ground Support System 
Strain: June 1998  August 
1998 
6.3.3.3 
SNF39012298002.011 [158368] Ground Support System 
Strain: September 1998  
May 1999 
6.3.3.3 
SN0001F3912298.015 [158372] Ground Support System 
Strain: June 1999  October 
1999 
6.3.3.3 
SN0007F3912298.019 [158387] Ground Support System 
Strain: November 1999  
May 2000 
6.3.3.3 
SN0101F3912298.025 [158401] Ground Support System 
Strain: June 2000  
November 2000 
6.3.3.3 
SN0107F3912298.030 [158409] Ground Support System 
Strain: December 2000  
May 2001 
6.3.3.3 
SN0203F3912298.034 [158362] Ground Support System 
Strain: June 2001  January 
14, 2002 
6.3.3.3 
SNF39012298002.005 [158418] Ground Support System 
Strain Corrected for 
Thermal Expansion: 
November 9, 1997  May 
1998 
6.3.3.3 
SNF39012298002.009 [158366] Ground Support System 
Strain Corrected for 
Thermal Expansion: June 
1998  August 1998 
6.3.3.3 
SNF39012298002.013 [158369] Ground Support System 
Strain Corrected for 
Thermal Expansion: 
September 1998  May 
1999 
6.3.3.3 
SN0001F3912298.017 [158373] Ground Support System 
Strain Corrected for 
Thermal Expansion: June 
1999  October 1999 
6.3.3.3 
SN0007F3912298.021 [158391] Ground Support System 
Strain Corrected for 
Thermal Expansion: 
November 1999  May 
2000 
6.3.3.3

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-7 September 2002 
Table 6.3-1. Output-DTNs along with Input-DTNs for the Drift Scale Test (continued) 
Input-DTN [DIRS] Input-DTN 
Description 
Input-DTN 
Text Location Output-DTN Output-DTN 
Description 
SN0101F3912298.027 [158407] Ground Support System 
Strain Corrected for 
Thermal Expansion: June 
2000  November 2000 
6.3.3.3 SN0203F3912298.038 
(continued) 
Smoothed Strain Data 
(continued) 
SN0107F3912298.032 [158414] Ground Support System 
Strain Corrected for 
Thermal Expansion: 
December 2000  May 
2001 
6.3.3.3 
SN0203F3912298.036 [158364] Ground Support System 
Strain Corrected for 
Thermal Expansion: June 
2001  January 14, 2002 
6.3.3.3 
LB980120123142.007 [158352] Acoustic Emissions: 
Baseline and Heating 
6.3.3.4 LB0208ACEMDSTH.001 Acoustic Emissions: 
Baseline and Heating 
LB980420123142.004 [113717] Acoustic Emissions: 
Baseline and Heating 
6.3.3.4 
LB990630123142.004 [158360] Acoustic Emissions: 
Baseline and Heating 
6.3.3.4 
LB000121123142.005 [158339] Acoustic Emissions: 
Baseline and Heating 
6.3.3.4 
LB000718123142.005 [158343] Acoustic Emissions: 
Baseline and Heating 
6.3.3.4 
LB0101ACEMDST1.001 
[158344] 
Acoustic Emissions: 
Baseline and Heating 
6.3.3.4 
LB0108ACEMDST5.001 
[158437] 
Acoustic Emissions: 
Baseline and Heating 
6.3.3.4 
SNL23030598001.003 [158422] Creep Testing of Concrete 
Liner 
6.3.3.5 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
SN020312210196.007 [158322] Laboratory Thermal 
Expansion 
6.3.3.5 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
SNL02100196001.001 [158420] Elastic Constants and 
Strength Properties 
6.3.3.5 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
SNL23030598001.001 [158370] Elastic Constants and 
Strength of Concrete 
6.3.3.5 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
SN0011F3912298.022 [158392] Rock Mass Displacement 
Pressure Data Plate Load 
Test October 16-17 2000 
6.3.3.6 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
SN0011F3912298.023 [158399] Rock Mass Displacement 
Pressure Data in Modulus 
October 16-17 2000 
6.3.3.6 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
GS970608314224.007 [158430] Rock Mass Rating and 
Rock Mass Quality 
6.3.3.6 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
SNF32020196001.010 [158314] Rock Mass Quality 6.3.3.6 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
SNF32020196001.015 [158434] Rock Mass Quality 6.3.3.6 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-8 September 2002 
Table 6.3-1. Output-DTNs along with Input-DTNs for the Drift Scale Test (continued) 
Input-DTN [DIRS] Input-DTN 
Description 
Input-DTN 
Text Location Output-DTN Output-DTN 
Description 
MO0207AL5WATER.001 
[159300] 
Water Sampling in Alcove 5 
(Results from 2/4/1997 
through 4/20/1999). 
6.3.4.1 SN0208F3903102.002 Field Water Sampling 
and Chemistry 
MO0101SEPFDDST.000 
[153711] 
Field Measured Data of 
Water Samples from the 
Drift Scale Test 
6.3.4.1 
SN0203F3903102.001 [159133] Drift Scale Test Water 
Sampling (with Results from 
4/17/2001 through 
1/14/2002) 
6.3.4.1 
MO0005PORWATER.000 
[150930] 
Perm-Sample Pore Water 
Data 
6.3.4.1 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
LL001100931031.008 [153288] Aqueous Chemistry of 
Water Sampled from 
Boreholes of the Drift Scale 
Test (DST) 
6.3.4.1 LL020709923142.023* Water Chemistry 
LL001200231031.009 [153616] Aqueous Chemistry of 
Water Sampled from 
Boreholes of the Drift Scale 
Test (DST) 
6.3.4.1 
LL020302223142.015 [159134] Aqueous Geochemistry of 
DST Samples Collected 
from HYD Boreholes. 
6.3.4.1 
LL020405123142.019 [159307] Aqueous Geochemistry of 
Condensed Fluids Collected 
During Studies of 
Introduced Materials 
6.3.4.1 
LB980420123142.005 [111471] Isotope Data for CO2 from 
Gas Samples Collected 
from DST: February 1998 
6.3.4.2 LB0208ISODSTHP.001 Gas Chemistry (CO2 
Concentration and 
Isotopic Data) 
LB980715123142.003 [111472] Isotope Data for CO2 from 
Gas Samples Collected 
from DST: June 4, 1998 
6.3.4.2 
LB981016123142.004 [113278] Isotope Data for CO2 from 
Gas and Water Samples: 
June 1998 to September 
1998 
6.3.4.2 
LB990630123142.003 [111476] Isotope Data for CO2 from 
Gas and Water Samples: 
September 1998 to May 
1999. 
6.3.4.2 
LB000121123142.003 [146451] Isotope Data for CO2 Gas 
Samples Collected from the 
Hydrology Boreholes: 
August 9, 1999 Through 
November 30, 1999 
6.3.4.2 
LB000718123142.003 [158342] Isotope Data for CO2 Gas 
Samples Collected from the 
Hydrology Boreholes: April 
18, 2000 Through April 19, 
2000. 
6.3.4.2

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-9 September 2002 
Table 6.3-1. Output-DTNs along with Input-DTNs for the Drift Scale Test (continued) 
Input-DTN [DIRS] Input-DTN 
Description 
Input-DTN 
Text Location Output-DTN Output-DTN 
Description 
LB0102CO2DST98.001 [159306] Concentration and Isotope 
Data for CO2 and H20 from 
Gas Samples Collected 
from Hydrology Boreholes: 
May and August 1999, April 
2000, January and April 
2001 
6.3.4.2 LB0208ISODSTHP.001 
(continued) 
Gas Chemistry (CO2 
Concentration and 
Isotopic Data) 
(continued) 
LB0108CO2DST05.001 [156888] Concentration and Isotope 
Data for CO2 and H20 from 
Gas Samples Collected 
from Hydrology Boreholes: 
May and August 1999, April 
2000, January and April 
2001 
6.3.4.2 
LB0203CO2DSTEH.001 
[158349] 
Concentration/Isotope Data 
for CO2/H20 from Gas 
Samples Collected from 
Hydrology Boreholes up to 
End of Heating 
6.3.4.2 
LB0206C14DSTEH.001 [159303] Carbon 14 Isotope Data 
from CO2 Gas Samples 
Collected from DST 
6.3.4.2 
LA9912SL831151.002 [146449] Percent Coverage By 
Fracture-Coating Minerals 
in Core ESF-HD-TEMP-2 
6.3.4.3 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
LA0201SL831225.001 [158426] Chemical, Textural, and 
Mineralogical 
Characteristics of Sidewall 
Samples from the Drift 
Scale Test. 
6.3.4.3 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
LA0009SL831151.001 [153485] Fracture Mineralogy of the 
ESF Single Heater Test 
Block, Alcove 5 
6.3.4.3 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
LA0201SL831225.001 [158426] Chemical, Textural, and 
Mineralogical 
Characteristics of Sidewall 
Samples from the Drift 
Scale Test. 
6.3.4.3 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
GS011108312322.008 [159136] Uranium Concentrations 
and 234u/238u Activity 
Ratios Analyzed Between 
February 1, 1999 and 
August 1, 2001 for Drift- 
Scale Heater Test Water 
Collected Between June 
1998 and April 2001, and 
Pore Water Collected 
Between March 1996 and 
April 1999. 
6.3.4.4 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
GS011108312322.009 [159137] Strontium Isotope Ratios 
and Strontium 
Concentrations in Water 
Samples from the Drift 
Scale Test Analyzed from 
March 16, 1999 to June 27, 
2001. 
6.3.4.4 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-10 September 2002 
Table 6.3-1. Output-DTNs along with Input-DTNs for the Drift Scale Test (continued) 
Input-DTN [DIRS] Input-DTN 
Description 
Input-DTN 
Text Location Output-DTN Output-DTN 
Description 
SN0203F3903102.001 [159133] Drift Scale Test Water 
Sampling (With Results 
from 4/17/2001 Through 
1/14/2002) 
6.3.4.5 SN0208F3903102.003 Field Hydrogen 
Fluoride (HF) Data 
LL020405123142.019 [159307] Aqueous Geochemistry of 
Condensed Fluids Collected 
During Studies of 
Introduced Materials. 
6.3.4.5 
LARO831422AQ97.002 [158431] DST Borehole Video 
Logging 
6.3.5.2 Unchanged-DTN Unchanged-DTN 
NOTE: * This data set was submitted as non-Q because of the preliminary status of a subset of data. That subset 
of data should only be used for corroborative purposes.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-11 September 2002 
Table 6.3-2. DST As-Built Borehole, Sensor, and Heater Information1 
Collar Coordinates (meters) 2 Bottom Coordinates (meters) 2 
Orientation Diameter Length 3 
Volume Types and No. of Sensors 
Borehole Borehole Primary Purpose x y z x y z Thermo- Mech. Humidity Pressure Electrode 5 
Electrical 
Number Identification meters meters meters meters meters meters Degree cm meters m3 
Couples RTD Thermistors REKA MPBX, RSG Neutron Sensor Transducer Sensor (ERT) Chemical Amps. 
BOREHOLES 
42 ESF-SDM-MPBX-1 MPBX - Rock Mass Displacement -29.304 13.820 4.631 -3.555 13.688 -0.371 -11.0 7.57 26.23 0.12 14 1 6 
43 ESF-SDM-MPBX-2 MPBX - Rock Mass Displacement -29.166 21.062 5.073 -3.424 20.743 0.356 -10.4 7.57 26.17 0.12 14 1 6 
44 ESF-SDM-MPBX-3 MPBX - Rock Mass Displacement -29.539 32.079 5.137 -3.600 32.192 -0.372 -12.0 7.57 26.52 0.12 14 1 6 
45 ESF-HD-ERT-1 Electrical Resistivity Tomography -28.875 4.577 4.118 9.565 4.674 13.693 14.0 7.57 39.62 0.18 41 
46 ESF-HD-ERT-2 Electrical Resistivity Tomography -27.408 4.572 1.533 9.093 4.533 -14.333 -23.5 7.57 39.80 0.18 41 
47 ESF-HD-NEU-1 Neutron Probe / GPR -29.114 6.385 4.636 7.166 6.338 21.099 24.4 7.57 39.84 0.18 1 
48 ESF-HD-NEU-2 Neutron Probe / GPR -29.051 6.391 4.042 9.515 6.260 13.545 13.8 7.57 39.72 0.18 1 
49 ESF-HD-NEU-3 Neutron Probe / GPR -29.039 6.377 3.435 10.841 6.703 7.714 6.1 7.57 40.11 0.18 1 
50 ESF-HD-NEU-4 Neutron Probe / GPR -29.012 6.395 2.558 9.680 6.419 -8.126 -15.4 7.57 40.14 0.18 1 
51 ESF-HD-NEU-5 Neutron Probe / GPR -28.993 6.414 2.254 8.072 6.687 -11.996 -21.0 7.57 39.71 0.18 1 
52 ESF-HD-CHE-1 Chemistry - SEAMIST -29.211 8.247 4.540 7.405 8.293 20.070 23.0 9.60 39.77 0.29 11 
53 ESF-HD-CHE-2 Chemistry - SEAMIST -29.232 8.258 4.014 9.415 8.702 13.889 14.3 9.60 39.89 0.29 6 
54 ESF-HD-CHE-3 Chemistry - SEAMIST -29.139 8.227 3.434 10.332 8.375 6.906 5.0 9.60 39.62 0.29 13 
55 ESF-HD-CHE-4 Chemistry - SEAMIST -29.233 8.224 2.583 5.087 7.976 -7.547 -16.4 9.60 35.78 0.26 12 
56 ESF-HD-CHE-5 Chemistry - SEAMIST -29.223 8.248 2.322 7.264 8.456 -13.833 -23.9 9.60 39.90 0.29 12 
57 ESF-HD-HYD-1 Hydrology -28.841 10.054 4.748 7.773 9.825 19.805 22.4 7.57 39.59 0.18 4 4 4 
58 ESF-HD-HYD-2 Hydrology -28.951 10.017 4.114 9.567 9.961 13.627 13.9 7.57 39.68 0.18 3 3 3 
59 ESF-HD-HYD-3 Hydrology -29.071 10.044 3.453 10.248 10.045 7.227 5.5 7.57 39.50 0.18 4 4 4 
60 ESF-HD-HYD-4 Hydrology -29.107 10.003 2.707 9.213 9.259 -7.328 -14.7 7.57 39.62 0.18 4 4 4 
61 ESF-HD-HYD-5 Hydrology -29.193 10.062 2.337 8.215 10.184 -12.022 -21.0 7.57 40.07 0.18 4 4 4 
62 ESF-HD-ERT-3 Electrical Resistivity Tomography -29.238 24.703 6.307 10.095 24.853 13.169 9.9 7.57 39.93 0.18 41 
63 ESF-HD-ERT-4 Electrical Resistivity Tomography -29.284 24.690 4.730 7.004 25.015 -11.927 -24.7 7.57 39.93 0.18 41 
64 ESF-HD-NEU-6 Neutron Probe / GPR -29.311 26.519 6.639 8.073 26.437 20.795 20.7 7.57 39.97 0.18 1 
65 ESF-HD-NEU-7 Neutron Probe / GPR -29.341 26.524 6.310 9.937 26.650 13.715 10.7 7.57 39.97 0.18 1 
66 ESF-HD-NEU-8 Neutron Probe / GPR -29.118 26.506 5.999 10.682 26.580 6.890 1.3 7.57 39.81 0.18 1 
67 ESF-HD-NEU-9 Neutron Probe / GPR -28.974 26.489 5.222 8.262 25.877 -7.953 -19.5 7.57 39.50 0.18 1 
68 ESF-HD-NEU-10 Neutron Probe / GPR -29.116 26.550 4.588 6.847 26.856 -12.272 -25.1 7.57 39.72 0.18 1 
69 ESF-HD-CHE-6 Chemistry - SEAMIST -29.199 28.368 6.842 8.312 28.683 20.044 19.4 7.57 39.77 0.18 10 
70 ESF-HD-CHE-7 Chemistry - SEAMIST -29.261 28.373 6.315 10.024 29.034 13.092 9.8 7.57 39.87 0.18 11 
71 ESF-HD-CHE-8 Chemistry - SEAMIST -29.393 28.345 5.964 10.664 27.898 6.244 0.4 9.60 40.06 0.29 13 
72 ESF-HD-CHE-9 Chemistry - SEAMIST -29.289 28.385 5.467 8.353 28.822 -8.300 -20.1 9.60 40.08 0.29 12 
73 ESF-HD-CHE-10 Chemistry - SEAMIST -29.062 28.375 4.546 6.628 28.542 -12.589 -25.6 7.57 39.59 0.18 11 
74 ESF-HD-HYD-6 Hydrology -29.380 30.194 6.811 8.168 30.068 20.601 20.2 7.57 40.00 0.18 4 4 4 
75 ESF-HD-HYD-7 Hydrology -29.306 30.215 6.303 10.024 30.485 12.913 9.5 7.57 39.88 0.18 4 4 4 
76 ESF-HD-HYD-8 Hydrology -29.295 30.177 6.002 10.731 30.178 6.737 1.1 7.57 40.03 0.18 4 4 4 
77 ESF-HD-HYD-9 Hydrology -29.331 30.210 5.672 8.268 29.906 -8.208 -20.3 7.57 40.08 0.18 3 3 3 
78 ESF-HD-HYD-10 Hydrology -29.376 30.191 4.702 6.165 30.379 -12.850 -26.3 7.57 39.64 0.18 4 4 4 
79 ESF-HD-TEMP-1 Temperature/Neutron 9.460 -11.022 3.752 9.459 48.478 2.706 -1.0 9.60 59.51 0.43 60 
80 ESF-HD-TEMP-2 Temperature/Neutron -9.486 -11.059 3.228 -9.903 48.570 3.162 -0.1 9.60 59.63 0.43 60 
81 ESF-HD-MPBX-1 MPBX - Rock Mass Displacement 6.994 -11.130 3.463 6.781 34.945 3.326 -0.2 7.57 46.08 0.21 19 6 
82 ESF-HD-MPBX-2 MPBX - Rock Mass Displacement -7.028 -10.958 3.451 -7.675 35.252 3.128 -0.4 7.57 46.22 0.21 20 6 
83 ESF-HD-WH-1 Wing Heater -2.483 1.837 -0.259 -14.005 1.848 -0.325 -0.3 9.60 11.52 0.08 5 
84 ESF-HD-WH-2 Wing Heater -2.488 3.645 -0.239 -14.030 3.676 -0.182 0.3 9.60 11.54 0.08 5 
85 ESF-HD-WH-3 Wing Heater -2.470 5.498 -0.248 -14.050 5.529 -0.255 0.0 9.60 11.58 0.08 5 
86 ESF-HD-WH-4 Wing Heater -2.491 7.310 -0.251 -13.908 7.190 -0.353 -0.5 9.60 11.42 0.08 5 
87 ESF-HD-WH-5 Wing Heater -2.605 9.154 -0.251 -13.963 9.334 -0.233 0.1 9.60 11.36 0.08 5 
88 ESF-HD-WH-6 Wing Heater -2.567 10.984 -0.242 -14.007 10.946 -0.249 0.0 9.60 11.44 0.08 5 
89 ESF-HD-WH-7 Wing Heater -2.778 12.816 -0.239 -14.001 12.881 -0.270 -0.2 9.60 11.22 0.08 5 
90 ESF-HD-WH-8 Wing Heater -2.517 14.602 -0.269 -14.088 14.507 -0.381 -0.6 9.60 11.57 0.08 5 
91 ESF-HD-WH-9 Wing Heater -2.512 16.482 -0.234 -13.791 16.640 -0.188 0.2 9.60 11.28 0.08 5

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-12 September 2002 
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-13 September 2002 
Table 6.3-2. DST As-Built Borehole, Sensor, and Heater Information1 (continued) 
Collar Coordinates (meters) 2 Bottom Coordinates (meters) 2 
Orientation Diameter Length 3 
Volume Types and No. of Sensors 
Borehole Borehole Primary Purpose x y z x y z Thermo- Mech. Humidity Pressure Electrode 5 
Electrical 
Number Identification meters meters meters meters meters meters Degree cm meters m3 
Couples RTD Thermistors REKA MPBX, RSG Neutron Sensor Transducer Sensor (ERT) Chemical Amps. 
92 ESF-HD-WH-10 Wing Heater -2.537 18.280 -0.260 -14.051 18.171 -0.342 -0.4 9.60 11.51 0.08 5 
93 ESF-HD-WH-11 Wing Heater -2.447 20.108 -0.274 -13.970 20.104 -0.475 -1.0 9.60 11.52 0.08 5 
94 ESF-HD-WH-12 Wing Heater -2.475 21.958 -0.246 -13.928 22.088 -0.237 0.0 9.60 11.45 0.08 5 
95 ESF-HD-WH-13 Wing Heater -2.575 23.777 -0.253 -14.065 23.777 -0.293 -0.2 9.60 11.49 0.08 5 
96 ESF-HD-WH-14 Wing Heater -2.603 25.617 -0.278 -14.092 25.653 -0.550 -1.4 9.60 11.49 0.08 5 
97 ESF-HD-WH-15 Wing Heater -2.541 27.451 -0.234 -14.051 27.619 -0.350 -0.6 9.60 11.51 0.08 5 
98 ESF-HD-WH-16 Wing Heater -2.445 29.241 -0.238 -13.642 29.156 -0.254 -0.1 9.60 11.20 0.08 5 
99 ESF-HD-WH-17 Wing Heater -2.584 31.126 -0.260 -14.038 31.267 -0.263 0.0 9.60 11.45 0.08 5 
100 ESF-HD-WH-18 Wing Heater -2.466 32.933 -0.247 -13.995 33.022 -0.311 -0.3 9.60 11.53 0.08 5 
101 ESF-HD-WH-19 Wing Heater -2.715 34.732 -0.262 -14.062 34.660 -0.281 -0.1 9.60 11.35 0.08 5 
102 ESF-HD-WH-20 Wing Heater -2.595 36.571 -0.283 -14.000 36.407 -0.621 -1.7 9.60 11.41 0.08 5 
103 ESF-HD-WH-21 Wing Heater -2.597 38.409 -0.246 -14.167 38.457 -0.160 0.4 9.60 11.57 0.08 5 
104 ESF-HD-WH-22 Wing Heater -2.613 40.230 -0.250 -14.133 40.306 -0.099 0.8 9.60 11.52 0.08 5 
105 ESF-HD-WH-23 Wing Heater -2.588 42.092 -0.272 -14.109 42.233 -0.246 0.1 9.60 11.52 0.08 5 
106 ESF-HD-WH-24 Wing Heater -2.590 43.875 -0.239 -14.109 43.911 -0.155 0.4 9.60 11.52 0.08 5 
107 ESF-HD-WH-25 Wing Heater -2.567 45.734 -0.260 -14.150 45.795 -0.384 -0.6 9.60 11.58 0.08 5 
108 ESF-HD-WH-26 Wing Heater 2.593 45.737 -0.278 14.083 45.805 -0.489 -1.1 9.60 11.49 0.08 5 
109 ESF-HD-WH-27 Wing Heater 2.581 43.876 -0.251 14.099 43.790 -0.302 -0.3 9.60 11.52 0.08 5 
110 ESF-HD-WH-28 Wing Heater 2.582 42.065 -0.258 14.106 42.121 -0.216 0.2 9.60 11.52 0.08 5 
111 ESF-HD-WH-29 Wing Heater 2.586 40.216 -0.236 14.099 40.278 -0.133 0.5 9.60 11.51 0.08 5 
112 ESF-HD-WH-30 Wing Heater 2.561 38.385 -0.262 14.178 38.316 -0.269 0.0 9.60 11.62 0.08 5 
113 ESF-HD-WH-31 Wing Heater 2.576 36.561 -0.245 14.141 36.476 -0.212 0.2 9.60 11.57 0.08 5 
114 ESF-HD-WH-32 Wing Heater 2.850 34.787 -0.273 14.325 34.970 -0.276 0.0 9.60 11.48 0.08 5 
115 ESF-HD-WH-33 Wing Heater 2.593 32.913 -0.232 14.115 32.667 -0.194 0.2 9.60 11.52 0.08 5 
116 ESF-HD-WH-34 Wing Heater 2.668 31.081 -0.254 13.903 31.031 -0.229 0.1 9.60 11.24 0.08 5 
117 ESF-HD-WH-35 Wing Heater 2.646 29.228 -0.241 13.813 29.165 -0.129 0.6 9.60 11.17 0.08 5 
118 ESF-HD-WH-36 Wing Heater 2.609 27.420 -0.207 14.168 27.390 -0.048 0.8 9.60 11.56 0.08 5 
119 ESF-HD-WH-37 Wing Heater 2.498 25.603 -0.256 14.100 25.657 -0.406 -0.7 9.60 11.60 0.08 5 
120 ESF-HD-WH-38 Wing Heater 2.509 23.775 -0.267 13.979 23.831 -0.377 -0.5 9.60 11.47 0.08 5 
121 ESF-HD-WH-39 Wing Heater 2.451 21.940 -0.272 14.077 21.945 -0.299 -0.1 9.60 11.63 0.08 5 
122 ESF-HD-WH-40 Wing Heater 2.482 20.114 -0.249 14.082 20.122 -0.232 0.1 9.60 11.60 0.08 5 
123 ESF-HD-WH-41 Wing Heater 2.490 18.287 -0.248 14.050 18.275 -0.297 -0.2 9.60 11.56 0.08 5 
124 ESF-HD-WH-42 Wing Heater 2.529 16.434 -0.273 14.025 16.280 -0.514 -1.2 9.60 11.50 0.08 5 
125 ESF-HD-WH-43 Wing Heater 2.509 14.643 -0.288 13.977 14.678 -0.523 -1.2 9.60 11.47 0.08 5 
126 ESF-HD-WH-44 Wing Heater 2.511 12.801 -0.245 14.145 12.865 -0.342 -0.5 9.60 11.63 0.08 5 
127 ESF-HD-WH-45 Wing Heater 2.578 10.949 -0.272 14.056 10.705 -0.441 -0.8 9.60 11.48 0.08 5 
128 ESF-HD-WH-46 Wing Heater 2.515 9.141 -0.260 14.012 9.212 -0.419 -0.8 9.60 11.50 0.08 5 
129 ESF-HD-WH-47 Wing Heater 2.612 7.313 -0.245 14.069 7.108 -0.272 -0.1 9.60 11.46 0.08 5 
130 ESF-HD-WH-48 Wing Heater 2.561 5.504 -0.230 14.011 5.350 -0.177 0.3 9.60 11.45 0.08 5 
131 ESF-HD-WH-49 Wing Heater 2.567 3.672 -0.277 14.078 3.705 -0.326 -0.2 9.60 11.51 0.08 5 
132 ESF-HD-WH-50 Wing Heater 2.648 1.816 -0.264 14.000 1.583 -0.444 -0.9 9.60 11.36 0.08 5 
133 ESF-HD-TEMP-3 Temperature 0.749 2.736 2.397 0.878 2.834 22.465 89.5 7.57 20.07 0.09 67 
134 ESF-HD-TEMP-4 Temperature 0.736 2.734 -1.603 0.635 2.787 -22.938 -89.7 7.57 21.34 0.10 67 
135 ESF-HD-ERT-5 Electrical Resistivity Tomography -0.763 2.709 2.397 -0.957 2.756 22.399 89.4 7.57 20.00 0.09 21 
136 ESF-HD-ERT-6 Electrical Resistivity Tomography -0.758 2.740 -1.615 -0.707 2.625 -17.953 -89.6 7.57 16.34 0.07 17 
137 ESF-HD-TEMP-5 Temperature 0.775 11.918 2.510 0.880 11.840 22.463 89.6 7.57 19.95 0.09 67 
138 ESF-HD-TEMP-6 Temperature -1.983 11.880 1.958 -15.960 11.516 15.926 45.0 7.57 19.76 0.09 67 
139 ESF-HD-TEMP-7 Temperature -2.569 11.891 -0.017 -22.536 11.953 0.149 0.5 7.57 19.97 0.09 67 
140 ESF-HD-TEMP-8 Temperature -1.911 11.907 -1.599 -17.366 11.791 -14.661 -40.2 7.57 20.24 0.09 67 
141 ESF-HD-TEMP-9 Temperature 0.764 11.893 -1.637 0.570 12.034 -22.973 -89.4 7.57 21.34 0.10 67

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-14 September 2002 
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-15 September 2002 
Table 6.3-2. DST As-Built Borehole, Sensor, and Heater Information1 (continued) 
Collar Coordinates (meters) 2 Bottom Coordinates (meters) 2 
Orientation Diameter Length 3 
Volume Types and No. of Sensors 
Borehole Borehole Primary Purpose x y z x y z Thermo- Mech. Humidity Pressure Electrode 5 
Electrical 
Number Identification meters meters meters meters meters meters Degree cm meters m3 
Couples RTD Thermistors REKA MPBX, RSG Neutron Sensor Transducer Sensor (ERT) Chemical Amps. 
142 ESF-HD-TEMP-10 Temperature 1.617 11.912 -1.639 16.017 11.903 -15.924 -44.8 7.57 20.28 0.09 67 
143 ESF-HD-TEMP-11 Temperature 2.665 11.890 -0.008 22.513 11.918 0.022 0.1 7.57 19.85 0.09 67 
144 ESF-HD-TEMP-12 Temperature 2.009 11.915 1.982 16.394 12.063 16.351 45.0 7.57 20.33 0.09 67 
145 ESF-HD-ERT-7 Electrical Resistivity Tomography -0.757 11.892 2.579 -0.899 12.019 22.667 89.5 7.57 20.09 0.09 21 
146 ESF-HD-ERT-8 Electrical Resistivity Tomography -0.757 11.894 -1.613 -1.065 11.929 -18.014 -88.9 7.57 16.40 0.07 17 
147 ESF-HD-MPBX-3 MPBX - Rock Mass Displacement 1.284 13.706 2.213 8.682 13.653 15.233 60.4 7.57 14.98 0.07 8 4 
148 ESF-HD-MPBX-4 MPBX - Rock Mass Displacement -1.390 13.725 2.387 -8.864 13.700 15.172 59.7 7.57 14.81 0.07 8 4 
149 ESF-HD-MPBX-5 MPBX - Rock Mass Displacement -0.028 13.697 2.484 -0.097 13.608 17.594 89.6 7.57 15.11 0.07 8 4 
150 ESF-HD-MPBX-6 MPBX - Rock Mass Displacement 0.006 13.693 -1.639 0.145 13.807 -18.008 -89.4 7.57 16.37 0.07 8 4 
151 ESF-HD-REKA-1 Thermal Conductivity and Diffusivity -0.027 17.352 2.669 -0.049 17.348 12.705 89.9 4.80 10.04 0.02 1 
152 ESF-HD-REKA-2 Thermal Conductivity and Diffusivity -2.437 17.359 0.017 -12.528 17.234 0.078 0.3 4.80 10.09 0.02 1 
153 ESF-HD-REKA-3 Thermal Conductivity and Diffusivity -1.603 17.359 -1.603 -9.199 17.241 -9.312 -45.4 4.80 10.82 0.02 1 
154 ESF-HD-MPBX-7 MPBX - Rock Mass Displacement 1.285 21.020 2.186 8.867 21.011 15.099 59.6 7.57 14.97 0.07 8 4 
155 ESF-HD-MPBX-8 MPBX - Rock Mass Displacement -1.317 21.006 2.270 -9.016 20.919 15.268 59.4 7.57 15.11 0.07 8 4 
156 ESF-HD-MPBX-9 MPBX - Rock Mass Displacement -0.013 21.001 2.504 0.028 20.944 17.482 89.7 7.57 14.98 0.07 8 4 
157 ESF-HD-MPBX-10 MPBX - Rock Mass Displacement -0.004 21.037 -1.624 0.031 21.014 -17.820 -89.9 7.57 16.20 0.07 8 4 
158 ESF-HD-TEMP-13 Temperature 0.757 22.847 2.565 0.412 23.021 22.599 88.9 7.57 20.04 0.09 67 
159 ESF-HD-TEMP-14 Temperature -1.949 22.876 1.931 -16.007 22.892 16.157 45.3 7.57 20.00 0.09 67 
160 ESF-HD-TEMP-15 Temperature -2.502 22.871 -0.004 -22.615 22.956 0.107 0.3 7.57 20.11 0.09 67 
161 ESF-HD-TEMP-16 Temperature -1.607 22.883 -1.605 -16.040 23.241 -15.875 -44.7 7.57 20.30 0.09 67 
162 ESF-HD-TEMP-17 Temperature 0.769 22.850 -1.623 0.828 23.004 -22.820 -89.6 7.57 21.20 0.10 67 
163 ESF-HD-TEMP-18 Temperature 1.515 22.828 -1.597 15.772 22.510 -15.913 -45.1 7.57 20.21 0.09 67 
164 ESF-HD-TEMP-19 Temperature 2.489 22.869 0.016 22.586 23.017 0.299 0.8 7.57 20.10 0.09 67 
165 ESF-HD-TEMP-20 Temperature 1.862 22.845 1.882 16.004 22.754 16.020 45.0 7.57 20.00 0.09 67 
166 ESF-HD-ERT-9 Electrical Resistivity Tomography -0.735 22.845 2.566 -0.558 23.020 22.390 89.3 7.57 19.83 0.09 21 
167 ESF-HD-ERT-10 Electrical Resistivity Tomography -0.772 22.810 -1.637 -0.458 22.747 -17.522 -88.8 7.57 15.89 0.07 17 
168 ESF-HD-TEMP-21 Temperature -0.071 31.952 2.451 -0.335 31.978 22.650 89.2 7.57 20.00 0.09 67 
169 ESF-HD-TEMP-22 Temperature -0.003 32.007 -1.629 0.259 32.435 -22.894 -88.6 7.57 21.20 0.10 67 
170 ESF-HD-TEMP-23 Temperature 0.751 39.306 2.488 0.746 39.115 22.604 89.5 7.57 20.12 0.09 67 
171 ESF-HD-TEMP-24 Temperature -1.853 39.313 1.817 -15.619 39.292 15.716 45.3 7.57 19.56 0.09 67 
172 ESF-HD-TEMP-25 Temperature -1.581 39.291 -1.571 -16.011 38.870 -16.010 -45.0 7.57 20.42 0.09 67 
173 ESF-HD-TEMP-26 Temperature 0.758 39.324 -1.623 0.715 39.104 -22.887 -89.4 7.57 21.27 0.10 67 
174 ESF-HD-TEMP-27 Temperature 1.584 39.306 -1.586 16.413 38.942 -15.444 -43.1 7.57 20.30 0.09 67 
175 ESF-HD-TEMP-28 Temperature 1.880 39.320 1.843 15.914 39.177 16.275 45.8 7.57 20.13 0.09 67 
176 ESF-HD-ERT-11 Electrical Resistivity Tomography -0.750 39.296 2.463 -0.779 39.120 22.462 89.5 7.57 20.00 0.09 21 
177 ESF-HD-ERT-12 Electrical Resistivity Tomography -0.739 39.327 -1.623 -0.749 39.263 -17.823 -89.8 7.57 16.20 0.07 17 
178 ESF-HD-MPBX-11 MPBX - Rock Mass Displacement 1.297 41.138 2.249 8.693 41.103 15.341 60.5 7.57 15.04 0.07 8 4 
179 ESF-HD-MPBX-12 MPBX - Rock Mass Displacement -1.319 41.143 2.279 -8.785 41.067 15.433 60.4 7.57 15.13 0.07 8 4 
180 ESF-HD-MPBX-13 MPBX - Rock Mass Displacement 0.010 41.134 2.597 0.121 41.079 17.687 89.5 7.57 15.09 0.07 8 4 
181 ESF-HD-MPBX-14 MPBX - Rock Mass Displacement 0.035 41.194 -1.658 0.083 41.211 -18.122 -89.8 7.57 16.46 0.07 8 4 
182 ESF-HD-PERM-1 Ambient Characterization 11.616 -15.677 2.284 11.954 -34.533 -4.367 -19.4 7.57 20.00 0.09 
183 ESF-HD-PERM-2 Ambient Characterization 10.716 -15.649 3.045 10.861 -35.731 3.003 -0.1 7.57 20.08 0.09 
184 ESF-HD-PERM-3 Ambient Characterization 8.853 -15.678 2.298 8.856 -34.504 -4.376 -19.5 7.57 19.97 0.09 
185 ESF-HD-HYD-11 Hydrology -29.488 44.728 7.563 10.084 44.145 13.613 8.7 7.57 40.04 0.18 4 4 4 
186 ESF-HD-HYD-12 Hydrology -29.609 44.774 6.470 5.008 44.352 -13.781 -30.3 7.57 40.11 0.18 4 4 4 
187 ESF-PL-MPBX-1 MPBX - Rock Mass Displacement 5.500 -5.000 -0.270 5.500 -7.500 -0.270 0.0 7.57 2.50 0.01 8 4 
188 ESF-PL-MPBX-2 MPBX - Rock Mass Displacement 5.500 -3.000 -0.270 5.500 -0.500 -0.270 0.0 7.57 2.50 0.01 8 4

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-16 September 2002 
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-17 September 2002 
Table 6.3-2. DST As-Built Borehole, Sensor, and Heater Information1 (continued) 
Collar Coordinates (meters) 2 Bottom Coordinates (meters) 2 
Orientation Diameter Length 3 
Volume Types and No. of Sensors 
Borehole Borehole Primary Purpose x y z x y z Thermo- Mech. Humidity Pressure Electrode 5 
Electrical 
Number Identification meters meters meters meters meters meters Degree cm meters m3 
Couples RTD Thermistors REKA MPBX, RSG Neutron Sensor Transducer Sensor (ERT) Chemical Amps. 
ESF-HD-CAN14 Floor Heater -0.144 0.565 -0.218 -0.144 5.213 -0.218 NA NA NA NA 9 60 
ESF-HD-CAN24 Floor Heater -0.156 5.848 -0.237 -0.156 10.496 -0.237 NA NA NA NA 9 60 
ESF-HD-CAN34 Floor Heater -0.139 11.013 -0.236 -0.139 15.661 -0.236 NA NA NA NA 9 60 
ESF-HD-CAN44 Floor Heater -0.177 16.305 -0.250 -0.177 20.953 -0.250 NA NA NA NA 9 60 
ESF-HD-CAN54 Floor Heater -0.165 21.544 -0.251 -0.165 26.192 -0.251 NA NA NA NA 9 60 
ESF-HD-CAN64 Floor Heater -0.176 26.892 -0.246 -0.176 31.540 -0.246 NA NA NA NA 9 60 
ESF-HD-CAN74 Floor Heater -0.167 32.077 -0.237 -0.167 36.725 -0.237 NA NA NA NA 9 60 
ESF-HD-CAN84 Floor Heater -0.148 37.375 -0.225 -0.148 42.023 -0.225 NA NA NA NA 9 60 
ESF-HD-CAN94 Floor Heater -0.163 42.664 -0.235 -0.163 47.312 -0.235 NA NA NA NA 9 60 
ESF-HD-83-WH1 Wing Heater -4.263 1.839 -0.269 -14.093 1.848 -0.326 NA NA NA NA 2 
ESF-HD-84-WH2 Wing Heater -4.208 3.650 -0.231 -14.038 3.676 -0.182 NA NA NA NA 2 
ESF-HD-85-WH3 Wing Heater -4.250 5.503 -0.249 -14.080 5.529 -0.255 NA NA NA NA 2 
ESF-HD-86-WH4 Wing Heater -4.081 7.293 -0.265 -13.910 7.190 -0.353 NA NA NA NA 2 
ESF-HD-87-WH5 Wing Heater -4.175 9.179 -0.249 -14.004 9.335 -0.233 NA NA NA NA 2 
ESF-HD-88-WH6 Wing Heater -4.137 10.979 -0.243 -13.967 10.946 -0.249 NA NA NA NA 2 
ESF-HD-89-WH7 Wing Heater -4.348 12.825 -0.243 -14.178 12.882 -0.270 NA NA NA NA 2 
ESF-HD-90-WH8 Wing Heater -4.267 14.588 -0.286 -14.096 14.507 -0.381 NA NA NA NA 2 
ESF-HD-91-WH9 Wing Heater -4.292 16.507 -0.227 -14.121 16.645 -0.187 NA NA NA NA 2 
ESF-HD-92-WH10 Wing Heater -4.237 18.264 -0.272 -14.066 18.171 -0.342 NA NA NA NA 2 
ESF-HD-93-WH11 Wing Heater -4.127 20.107 -0.303 -13.955 20.104 -0.475 NA NA NA NA 2 
ESF-HD-94-WH12 Wing Heater -4.035 21.976 -0.245 -13.864 22.087 -0.237 NA NA NA NA 2 
ESF-HD-95-WH13 Wing Heater -4.255 23.777 -0.259 -14.085 23.777 -0.293 NA NA NA NA 2 
ESF-HD-96-WH14 Wing Heater -4.233 25.622 -0.317 -14.060 25.653 -0.549 NA NA NA NA 2 
ESF-HD-97-WH15 Wing Heater -3.691 27.468 -0.246 -13.519 27.611 -0.345 NA NA NA NA 2 
ESF-HD-98-WH16 Wing Heater -4.115 29.228 -0.240 -13.945 29.154 -0.254 NA NA NA NA 2 
ESF-HD-99-WH17 Wing Heater -4.184 31.146 -0.260 -14.013 31.267 -0.263 NA NA NA NA 2 
ESF-HD-100-WH18 Wing Heater -4.186 32.946 -0.257 -14.015 33.022 -0.311 NA NA NA NA 2 
ESF-HD-101-WH19 Wing Heater -4.215 34.722 -0.265 -14.045 34.660 -0.281 NA NA NA NA 2 
ESF-HD-102-WH20 Wing Heater -4.204 36.548 -0.331 -14.029 36.407 -0.622 NA NA NA NA 2 
ESF-HD-103-WH21 Wing Heater -4.267 38.416 -0.234 -14.097 38.457 -0.161 NA NA NA NA 2 
ESF-HD-104-WH22 Wing Heater -4.313 40.241 -0.228 -14.142 40.306 -0.099 NA NA NA NA 2 
ESF-HD-105-WH23 Wing Heater -4.018 42.109 -0.269 -13.847 42.230 -0.247 NA NA NA NA 2 
ESF-HD-106-WH24 Wing Heater -4.260 43.880 -0.227 -14.090 43.911 -0.155 NA NA NA NA 2 
ESF-HD-107-WH25 Wing Heater -4.267 45.743 -0.278 -14.096 45.795 -0.383 NA NA NA NA 2 
ESF-HD-108-WH26 Wing Heater 4.263 45.747 -0.309 14.091 45.805 -0.489 NA NA NA NA 2 
ESF-HD-109-WH27 Wing Heater 4.211 43.864 -0.258 14.041 43.790 -0.302 NA NA NA NA 2 
ESF-HD-110-WH28 Wing Heater 4.202 42.073 -0.252 14.032 42.121 -0.216 NA NA NA NA 2 
ESF-HD-111-WH29 Wing Heater 4.226 40.225 -0.221 14.055 40.278 -0.133 NA NA NA NA 2 
ESF-HD-112-WH30 Wing Heater 4.311 38.375 -0.263 14.141 38.316 -0.269 NA NA NA NA 2 
ESF-HD-113-WH31 Wing Heater 4.296 36.548 -0.240 14.126 36.476 -0.212 NA NA NA NA 2 
ESF-HD-114-WH32 Wing Heater 4.450 34.813 -0.273 14.279 34.969 -0.276 NA NA NA NA 2 
ESF-HD-115-WH33 Wing Heater 4.233 32.878 -0.227 14.060 32.668 -0.194 NA NA NA NA 2 
ESF-HD-116-WH34 Wing Heater 4.018 31.075 -0.251 13.848 31.031 -0.229 NA NA NA NA 2 
ESF-HD-117-WH35 Wing Heater 3.946 29.221 -0.228 13.775 29.165 -0.129 NA NA NA NA 2 
ESF-HD-118-WH36 Wing Heater 4.219 27.416 -0.185 14.048 27.390 -0.050 NA NA NA NA 2 
ESF-HD-119-WH37 Wing Heater 4.268 25.611 -0.279 14.097 25.657 -0.406 NA NA NA NA 2 
ESF-HD-120-WH38 Wing Heater 4.009 23.782 -0.281 13.838 23.830 -0.376 NA NA NA NA 2 
ESF-HD-121-WH39 Wing Heater 4.251 21.941 -0.276 14.081 21.945 -0.299 NA NA NA NA 2 
ESF-HD-122-WH40 Wing Heater 3.162 20.114 -0.248 12.992 20.121 -0.234 NA NA NA NA 2 
ESF-HD-123-WH41 Wing Heater 4.130 18.285 -0.255 13.960 18.275 -0.297 NA NA NA NA 2 
ESF-HD-124-WH42 Wing Heater 4.328 16.410 -0.311 14.155 16.278 -0.517 NA NA NA NA 2 
ESF-HD-125-WH43 Wing Heater 4.299 14.648 -0.325 14.127 14.678 -0.526 NA NA NA NA 2 
ESF-HD-126-WH44 Wing Heater 4.131 12.810 -0.259 13.960 12.864 -0.340 NA NA NA NA 2 
ESF-HD-127-WH45 Wing Heater 4.287 10.913 -0.297 14.114 10.704 -0.442 NA NA NA NA 2 
ESF-HD-128-WH46 Wing Heater 4.115 9.151 -0.282 13.944 9.212 -0.418 NA NA NA NA 2 
ESF-HD-129-WH47 Wing Heater 3.922 7.290 -0.248 13.750 7.114 -0.271 NA NA NA NA 2 
ESF-HD-130-WH48 Wing Heater 4.161 5.482 -0.223 13.990 5.350 -0.177 NA NA NA NA 2 
ESF-HD-131-WH49 Wing Heater 3.067 3.673 -0.279 12.897 3.702 -0.321 NA NA NA NA 2 
HEATERS

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-18 September 2002 
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-19 September 2002 
Table 6.3-2. DST As-Built Borehole, Sensor, and Heater Information1 (continued) 
Collar Coordinates (meters) 2 Bottom Coordinates (meters) 2 
Orientation Diameter Length 3 
Volume Types and No. of Sensors 
Borehole Borehole Primary Purpose x y z x y z Thermo- Mech. Humidity Pressure Electrode 5 
Electrical 
Number Identification meters meters meters meters meters meters Degree cm meters m3 
Couples RTD Thermistors REKA MPBX, RSG Neutron Sensor Transducer Sensor (ERT) Chemical Amps. 
ESF-HD-132-WH50 Wing Heater 4.287 1.782 -0.290 14.114 1.581 -0.446 NA NA NA NA 2 
MISC. 
ESF-HD-BHSF Bulkhead NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 9 
ESF-HD-CDEX-MPBX-1 Cross Extensometer 0.427 42.357 2.510 0.409 42.357 -1.250 NA NA NA NA 3 1 
ESF-HD-CDEX-MPBX-2 Cross Extensometer 2.547 42.268 -0.019 -2.547 42.277 0.011 NA NA NA NA 3 1 
ESF-HD-SURF Surface Monitor NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 50 50 
ESF-HD-AIR Air Monitor NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 12 2 5 1 
ESF-HD-RACK Type K TC in Rack NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 26 
ESF-HD-CAN-CBL-RTD RTD in Power Cable Tray NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 7 
ESF-HD-CAN TCO Power Monitor Panel in CD NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 8 
ESF-HD-WH-CBL-RTD RTD in Power Cable Tray NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 7 
ESF-HD-WH TCO Power Monitor Panel in CD NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 8 
ESF-HD-SIG-CBL-RTD RTD in Signal Cable Tray NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 6 
ESF-HD-TOTAL Total Volt.,Amp.,Pwr. NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 9 
ESF-HD-OFF 1000 ohm / 4-wire RTD NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 4 6 
ESF-HD-CHEM-PAD-REF Ref. Monitor of Absorbing Pad NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 11 1 
SYS-1,2,3,4-VXI Thermistor in Cabinets NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 108 
VXI-EXH-TEMP Thermal Monitor NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 15 
Total 3247.77 17.18 630 1944 111 3 138 10 48 51 316 5 
122 673 
Total Number of Sensors (All Types) : 3730 
Notes: 
1. Technical Data Management System Numbers: TDIF: 309730, DTN: MO0002ABBLSLDS.000 [147304]. 
2. Borehole Coordinates are Referenced to a 0,0,0 Coordinate Located at the Center of the Bulkhead in the Heated Drift. 
3. Borehole Length is Calculated Using the Surveyed X,Y,Z Coordinates. 
4. Canister Heater Coordinates are for the Approximate Longitudinal Centerline of the Two Ends. It was Estimated Based on Its Dimensions of Length (4.6482 m) and Diameter (1.6764 m). 
5. Not Considered an Individual Sensor

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-20 September 2002 
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-21 September 2002 
Table 6.3.1.3-1. Summary of Thermal Conductivity Data for Saturated Specimens from the DST Block 
Thermal Conductivity (W/m-K) 
Distance 
from collar (ft) 
Max. 
Temp. (.C) 
30.C 50.C 70.C Mean STD(a) N(a) 
ESF-SDM-MPBX1-C 
1.0 
32.1 
40.6 
62.0 
80.5 
70 
70 
70 
70 
70 
2.2 
2.2 
2.1 
2.2 
2.15 
2.2 
2.2 
2.1 
2.2 
2.1 
2.2 
2.1 
2.1 
2.2 
2.1 
2.2 
2.2 
2.1 
2.2 
2.1 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
33
3
3
3 
N(a) = 
Mean = 
STD(a) = 
5 
2.2 
0.1 
5 
2.2 
0.0 
5 
2.1 
0.0 
ESF-SDM-MPBX2-C 
13.0 
29.0 
48.4 
71.5 
84.6 
70 
70 
70 
70 
70 
2.1 
2.1 
2.0 
2.3 
2.0 
2.1 
2.1 
2.0 
2.3 
2.0 
2.1 
2.1 
2.0 
2.3 
2.1 
2.1 
2.1 
2.0 
2.3 
2.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.1 
3
3
3
33
N(a) = 
Mean = 
STD(a) = 
5 
2.1 
0.1 
5 
2.1 
0.1 
5 
2.1 
0.1 
ESF-SDM-MPBX3-C 
3.0 
17.7 
38.7 
72.0 
85.3 
70 
70 
70 
70 
70 
1.9 
2.1 
2.2 
2.2 
2.1 
1.9 
2.1 
2.2 
2.2 
2.1 
1.9 
2.1 
2.2 
2.2 
2.1 
1.9 
2.1 
2.2 
2.2 
2.1 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
3
3
3
3
3 
N(a) = 
Mean = 
STD(a) = 
5 
2.1 
0.1 
5 
2.1 
0.1 
5 
2.1 
0.1 
ESF-AOD-HDFR1-C 
8.6 
32.2 
48.7 
68.8 
97.5 
70 
70 
70 
70 
70 
2.0 
2.1 
1.9 
2.1 
2.3 
2.0 
2.1 
1.9 
2.1 
2.3 
2.0 
2.1 
2.0 
2.0 
2.3 
2.0 
2.1 
1.9 
2.1 
2.3 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
33
3
3
3 
N(a) = 
Mean = 
STD(a) = 
5 
2.1 
0.2 
5 
2.1 
0.1 
5 
2.1 
0.1 
All Drift Scale Test Characterization Boreholes 
N(a) = 
Mean = 
STD(a) = 
20 
2.1 
0.1 
20 
2.1 
0.1 
20 
2.1 
0.1 
All Specimens, All Temperatures 
N(a) = 
Mean = 
STD(a) = 
60 
2.1 
0.1 
NOTE: Air dried. Lithostratigraphic unit: Tptpmn, except for HDFR1-97.5-C, which may be from Tptpll (see Section 3.2). 
(a) N = Number of samples; STD = Standard deviation

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-22 September 2002 
Table 6.3.1.3-2. Thermal Conductivity as a Function of Saturation State(a) 
Linear Fit(b): K=Kd+SlopeSl Fit(b) to K=Kd+(Kw-Kd) l S 
Lithostratigraphic 
Unit 
Number 
of 
Specimens 
Intercept 
or Kd 
W/(m-K) 
Slope Kw 
W/(m-K) 
Sum of 
Squared 
Errors 
Kd 
W/(m-K) 
Kw 
W/(m-K) 
Sum of 
Squared 
Errors 
Tptpmn 6 1.79 0.414 2.20 0.46 1.71 2.14 0.53 
Tac4 1 0.52 0.54 1.06 0.007 0.42 0.98 0.011 
Tac3 1 0.53 0.55 1.08 0.004 0.43 1.00 0.013 
Tac2 2 0.52 0.59 1.11 0.020 0.39 1.03 0.056 
Tacbs 2 0.71 0.59 1.31 0.007 0.59 1.21 0.062 
NOTE: (a) Refer to SNL 1998 [118788] and DTN cited in Table 4-3. 
(b) Kw: Thermal Conductivity for Saturated Specimen 
Kd: Thermal Conductivity for Oven-Dried Specimen 
Sl: Liquid Saturation 
Table 6.3.1.4-1. REKA Results with No Background Temperature Correction 
REKA Location Thermal Conductivity, K (W/(m-C)) Thermal Diffusivity, Alpha 
(m2/s) 
1 1.69 0.76 x 10-6 
2 1.95 0.77 x 10-6 
3 1.86 0.91 x 10-6 
4 1.88 0.82 x 10-6 
5 1.70 0.85 x 10-6 
Source: CRWMS M&O 1997 ([101539], Section 10.2) 
NOTE: Values in this table derived from in situ measurements are used for corroborative purposes with 
laboratory measurements discussed in Section 6.3.1.3. 
Error of fit is the Root Mean Square between the simulated and measured temperature fields, all 
having 35 readings with time and 6 readings along the length of the REKA probe. 
Table 6.3.1.4-2. REKA Results with Background Temperature Correction 
REKA Location Thermal Conductivity, K (W/(m-C)) Thermal Diffusivity, Alpha 
(m2/s) 
1 1.72 0.93 x 10-6 
2 1.92 0.90 x 10-6 
3 1.89 1.04 x 10-6 
4 1.93 1.09 x 10-6 
5 1.76 0.97 x 10-6 
Source: CRWMS M&O 1997 ([101539], Section 10.2) 
NOTE: Values in this table derived from in situ measurements are used for corroborative purposes with 
laboratory measurements discussed in Section 6.3.1.3. 
Error of fit is the Root Mean Square between the simulated and measured temperature fields, all 
having 35 readings with time and 6 readings along the length of the Sierra Science REKA probe.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-23 September 2002 
Table 6.3.2.2-1 DST GPR Measurement Schedule 
Acquisition Date Heating Days Borehole Pairs 
PRE 10/29/97 -33.0 51-50, 50-49, 68-67, 67-66, 66-65, 65-64 
PHASE 1 02/13/98 74.0 51-50, 50-49, 68-67, 67-66, 66-65, 65-64 
PHASE 2 01/26/99 421.0 51-50, 50-49, 68-67, 67-66, 66-65 
PHASE 3 04/15/99 533.0 51-50, 50-49, 68-67, 67-66, 66-65 
PHASE 4 10/26/99 694.0 51-50, 50-49, 68-67, 67-66, 66-65 
PHASE 5 04/13/00 864.0 51-50, 50-49, 68-67, 66-65 
PHASE 6 09/28/00 1032.0 51-50, 50-49, 66-65, 65-64 
PHASE 7 02/06/01 1163.0 51-50, 50-49, 66-65, 65-64 
PHASE 8 06/20/01 1330.0 51-50, 50-49, 66-65, 65-64 
PHASE 9 10/30/01 1429.0 51-50, 50-49, 66-65 
PHASE 10 01/10/02 1501.0 51-50, 50-49, 66-65, 65-64

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-24 September 2002 
Table 6.3.2.4-1. Estimated Local Permeability for 41 Packed-off Zones in 14 Boreholes During DST 
Pre-Heating (Nov/Dec 1996 and Feb/Mar 1997) 
Borehole ID k(m2) in zone 1 k(m2) in zone 2 k(m2) in zone 3 
45 ESF-HD-ERT- 1 5.8E-14 2.4E-14 4.5E-13 
46 ESF-HD-ERT-2 4.1E-15 6.2E-15 9.0E-14 
47 ESF-HD-NEU-1 6.1E-14 4.4E-13 4.7E-13 
48 ESF-HD-NEU-2 2.4E-14 3.5E-14 3.4E-13 
51 ESF-HD-NEU-5 8.8E-16 4.4E-13 4.1E-14 
52 ESF-HD-CHE-1 1.0E-13 1.2E-13 2.0E-12 
53 ESF-HD-CHE-2 1.1E-13 1.3E-12 N/A 
56 ESF-HD-CHE-5 1.9E-15 3.4E-14 4.8E-13 
57 ESF-HD-HYD-1 2.7E-13 6.1E-14 1.4E-13 
69 ESF-HD-CHE-6 2.lE-13 9.5E-15 4.9E-13 
70 ESF-HD-CHE-7 1.9E-14 4.5E-14 4.2E-13 
73 ESF-HD-CHE-l0 6.6E-14 6.8E-15 1.0E-13 
75 ESF-HD-HYD-7 4.9E-13 1.4E-13 3.0E-13 
78 ESF-HD-HYD-10 15.5E-14 1.1E-14 7.8E-14

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-25 September 2002 
Table 6.3.2.4-2. Parameters Used in Equation 5.2-1 for the Estimation of Local Permeability During 
DST Pre-Heating (July 1997) 
Borehole ID_Data File L (m) Q (SLPM) P2-P1 (kPa) P1 (kPa) k (m2) 
177_02JUL19 12.822 10 30.67 89.24 7.01E-15 
158_02JUL08 16.076 99 16.68 90.14 1.12E-13 
159_02JUL07 16.062 99 8.48 89.38 2.33E-13 
160_01JUL03 16.012 499 0.83 89.45 1.26E-11 
160_01JUL04 12.964 499 4.20 89.52 2.89E-12 
161_01JUL01 16.312 299 11.09 89.52 5.22E-13 
161_01JUL02 13.264 199 15.99 89.45 2.79E-13 
162_01JUL01 17.822 54 27.01 89.45 3.32E-14 
163_02JUL01 16.312 99 32.60 89.38 5.29E-14 
164_02JUL02 16.012 299 15.99 89.45 3.59E-13 
164_02JUL03 12.964 299 17.99 89.52 3.76E-13 
165_02JUL05 16.012 299 16.61 89.52 3.44E-13 
166_02JUL06 16.038 99 21.36 89.59 8.63E-14 
167_01JUL06 12.822 199 35.56 89.52 1.17E-13 
170_02JUL21 16.012 99 5.38 89.72 3.72E-13 
171_02JUL20 16.012 99 22.88 89.45 8.02E-14 
172_02JUL18 16.312 99 6.34 89.45 3.10E-13 
173_02JUL17 17.822 21 33.15 89.52 1.02E-14 
174_02JUL16 16.312 21 21.50 89.45 1.79E-14 
176_02JUL22 16.012 199 5.72 89.38 7.05E-13 
100_02JUL15 7.512 99 7.37 93.24 4.61E-13 
115_02JUL12 7.512 99 4.69 93.17 7.36E-13 
116_02JUL11 7.512 199 6.68 93.24 1.03E-12 
117_02JUL10 7.512 299 12.13 93.31 8.26E-13 
118_02JUL09 7.512 299 8.13 93.17 1.26E-12 
98_02JUL13 7.512 499 1.17 93.24 1.51E-11 
99_02JUL14 7.512 299 4.62 93.24 2.26E-12

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-26 September 2002 
Table 6.3.2.4-3. Parameters Used in Equation 5.2-1 for the Estimation of Local DST Permeability 
During Pre-Heating (Nov 1997) 
Borehole-Zone (data file ID) L(m) Q(SLPM) (P2-P1) (kPa) P1 (kPa) k (m2) 
57-1 (11797544PM) 8.84 20 4.58 89.2 1.46E-13 
57-2 (11897401AM) 6.10 100 18.5 89.5 2.26E-13 
57-3 (11897218PM) 7.62 2 39.9 89.3 1.58E-15 
57-4 (119971235AM) 10.55 200 12.6 89.7 4.37E-13 
58-1 (111697133AM) 6.10 20 5.12 90.2 1.74E-13 
58-2 (1116971151AM) 8.54 20 3.18 90.4 2.15E-13 
58-3 (1116971008PM) 17.98 171 3.74 89.9 8.45E-13 
59-1 (111097610PM) 10.06 100 22.1 86.9 1.27E-13 
59-1 (111097610PM) 10.06 20 4.25 86.9 1.45E-13 
59-2 (111197427AM) 7.62 100 8.95 90.8 4.04E-13 
59-3 (111197244PM) 8.54 100 10.8 88.0 3.11E-13 
59-4 (111297101AM) 7.19 200 7.8 91.6 9.69E-13 
60-1 (111097101PM) 5.49 20 2.75 88.8 3.62E-13 
60-1 (111097101PM) 5.49 100 21.2 88.8 2.13E-13 
60-2 (1110971118PM) 10.67 100 5.8 87.7 4.98E-13 
60-3 (111197936AM) 5.49 2 7.2 88.5 1.35E-14 
60-4 (111197753PM) 11.19 20 45.5 89.5 9.85E-15 
61-1 (117971235PM) 7.01 200 34 89.5 2.04E-13 
61-1 (117971235PM) 7.01 100 14.6 89.5 2.61E-13 
61-2 (117971052PM) 8.54 100 3.85 88.8 8.99E-13 
61-3 (11897909AM) 6.10 20 16.3 100.0 4.68E-14 
61-4 (11897727PM) 12.63 100 26.9 89.4 8.23E-14 
74-1 (11497749PM) 10.37 100 10.6 90.0 2.65E-13 
74-2 (114971139PM) 6.71 20 12.9 90.3 6.12E-14 
74-3 (11597330AM) 4.27 20 8.04 90.4 1.44E-13 
74-4 (111797308PM) 14.09 100 17.3 90.9 1.21E-13 
75-1 (11597140PM) 8.23 100 11.3 91.4 2.95E-13 
75-2 (11597450PM) 7.32 100 23.7 90.8 1.46E-13 
75-3 (115978PM) 10.67 100 17.3 89.9 1.53E-13 
75-4 (111797129PM) 8.48 100 4.68 90.8 7.24E-13 
76-1 (116971106AM) 7.93 100 13.1 90.0 2.64E-13 
76-2 (11697216PM) 8.54 20 5.27 89.8 1.29E-13 
76-3 (11697526PM) 8.54 20 9.89 89.0 6.76E-14 
76-4 (11697836PM) 10.00 20 6.82 90.5 8.62E-14 
77-1 (111597825PM) 8.84 100 21.5 91.0 1.40E-13

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-27 September 2002 
Table 6.3.2.4-3. Parameters Used in Equation 5.2-1 for the Estimation of Local DST Permeability During 
Pre-Heating (Nov 1997) (continued) 
Borehole-Zone (data file ID) L(m) Q(SLPM) (P2-P1) (kPa) P1 (kPa) k (m2) 
77-1 (11697351PM) 8.84 20 1.87 90.6 3.57E-13 
77-1 (111397341PM) 8.84 20 1.72 89.9 3.91E-13 
77-2 (111697642AM) 5.49 20 21.2 90.0 4.21E-14 
77-2 (11697701PM) 5.49 20 33.1 89.3 2.56E-14 
77-2 (111397828PM) 5.49 20 31.4 88.7 2.74E-14 
77-2 (110797729AM) 5.49 20 31.1 89.4 2.75E-14 
77-3 (111697459PM) 22.70 100 3.83 90.5 3.94E-13 
78-1 (1117971013AM) 6.10 20 4.4 90.4 2.02E-13 
78-2 (11797419AM) 8.23 20 14.3 90.4 4.64E-14 
78-3 (11797554AM) 5.79 20 16 89.9 5.49E-14 
78-4 (1115971008AM) 14.49 20 4 91.1 1.09E-13 
185-1 (115971204PM) 5.79 20 2.75 89.5 3.46E-13 
185-2 (11597315PM) 8.54 100 15.6 89.4 2.07E-13 
185-3 (11597625PM) 15.24 100 20.9 90.2 9.26E-14 
185-4 (11597935PM) 6.65 20 4.18 89.6 2.01E-13 
186-1 (11497553PM) 5.79 20 2.47 90.4 3.80E-13 
186-2 (11497944PM) 8.54 20 22.1 93.9 2.71E-14 
186-3 (11597134AM) 13.11 20 51.9 89.9 7.34E-15 
186-4 (1117971151AM) 5.09 2 11.4 90.6 8.68E-15

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-28 September 2002 
Table 6.3.2.4-4. Date of Pneumatic Packer Deflation in the DST Hydrology Boreholes 
Packer Location Date 
57-4 March 22, 2000 
59-1 February 6, 2001 
60-1 November 14, 2001 
60-2 January 1, 2000 
60-3 November 30, 1999 
60-4 August 27, 1999* 
61-2 November 7, 2001 
61-3 July 24, 2000 
61-4 February 6, 2001 
76-3 December 24, 2000 
77-3 January 7, 1998 
78.2 December 24, 2000 
78.3 December 1, 1999 
78.4 September 9, 2000 
* Reinflated February 16, 2000, deflated 
again August 15, 2000 
Table 6.3.2.4-5. DST Tracer Testing Locations and Parameters 
Test 
Name 
Injection 
Location 
Withdrawal 
Location 
Qinject 
(SLPM) 
Qwithdraw 
(SLPM) 
Tracer 
Injection 
Duration 
(min) 
Average Zone 
Separation 
(m) 
76-2 
10:1 
76-2 75-2 3 30 87 2.78 
76-2 
30:1 
76-2 75-2 2 20 276 5.64 
76-4 
10:1 
76-4 75-4 1 30 93 2.78 
Huffpuff 
76-2 76-2 10 20 20 N/A 
Table 6.3.2.4-6. DST Plug-Flow Tracer Analysis of Cross-Hole Tracer Data 
Tracer Test Zone length (m) t50 (min) .fracture 
76-2-75-2 10:1 7.93 67 .010 
76-2-75-2 30:1 7.93 56 .006 
76-4-75-4 10:1 9.12 294 .009

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-29 September 2002 
Table 6.3.2.5-1. Laboratory Measurement of Dry-Drilled Cores from DST Permeability Boreholes (182, 
183, 184) 
Borehole #182, ESF-HD-PERM-1 
sample location saturation porosity bulk density particle density gravimetric 
water content 
(m) (%) (%) (g/cc) (g/cc) (g/g) 
5.5 86.67 9.61 2.27 2.51 0.037 
9.9 89.67 11.02 2.24 2.52 0.044 
15.5 85.08 10.27 2.25 2.51 0.039 
19.8 86.72 10.27 2.25 2.51 0.039 
Borehole #183, ESF-HD-PERM-2 
sample location saturation porosity bulk density particle density gravimetric 
water content 
(m) (%) (%) (g/cc) (g/cc) (g/g) 
5.2 83.84 9.62 2.27 2.51 0.035 
10.1 82.86 12.02 2.21 2.51 0.045 
15.3 76.61 13.35 2.19 2.53 0.046 
19.9 79.21 10.89 2.24 2.51 0.038 
Borehole #184, ESF-HD-PERM-3 
sample location saturation porosity bulk density particle density gravimetric 
water content 
(m) (%) (%) (g/cc) (g/cc) (g/g) 
5.1 81.40 9.87 2.25 2.50 0.035 
10.0 86.61 10.91 2.24 2.51 0.042 
15.5 85.80 9.43 2.27 2.51 0.035 
18.9 81.76 10.17 2.26 2.52 0.037 
Borehole Summary 
saturation porosity bulk density particle density gravimetric 
water content 
(%) (%) (g/cc) (g/cc) (g/g) 
average 83.85 10.62 2.25 2.51 0.039 
standard 
deviation 
3.67 1.14 0.02 0.01 0.004

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-30 September 2002 
Table 6.3.2.5-2. Laboratory Measurement of Wet-Drilled Cores from DST Boreholes (81, 52, 53, 56) 
Borehole #81, ESF-HD-MPBX-1 
sample location saturation porosity bulk density particle density gravimetric 
water content 
(m) (%) (%) (g/cc) (g/cc) (g/g) 
4.6# 96.43 10.15 2.25 2.50 0.043 
6.8 84.97 9.73 2.27 2.51 0.036 
12.3** 96.02 10.16 2.26 2.52 0.043 
17.8## 96.80 9.46 2.26 2.49 0.040 
20.8* 103.77 15.34 2.14 2.53 0.073 
24.1 94.10 8.77 2.28 2.50 0.036 
32.0 95.42 9.67 2.28 2.52 0.040 
35.1^ 92.97 11.81 2.21 2.51 0.050 
39.4 92.82 10.31 2.26 2.52 0.042 
45.3 94.57 9.27 2.28 2.51 0.038 
* two open fractures + "crushed zone" + porous looking calcite inclusion 
# entire surface of core was wet 
^ large open fracture down center of upper half 
** closed vertical fracture along core axis 
## two fractures with small aperture 
Borehole #52, ESF-HD-CHE-1 
sample location saturation porosity bulk density particle density gravimetric 
water content 
(m) (%) (%) (g/cc) (g/cc) (g/g) 
15.3^ 87.56 11.73 2.22 2.52 0.046 
18# 95.91 17.32 2.09 2.52 0.079 
26.5^ 87.89 11.04 2.24 2.51 0.043 
29.9* 97.32 13.98 2.16 2.51 0.063 
35.0 96.98 18.19 2.07 2.53 0.085 
38.2** 98.58 16.57 2.11 2.53 0.077 
* contains large open vug on side surface 
# large fracture exposed on surface 
^ water drop loss during transfer 
** contains fracture on side surface 
Borehole #53, ESF-HD-CHE-2 
sample location saturation porosity bulk density particle density gravimetric 
water content 
(m) (%) (%) (g/cc) (g/cc) (g/g) 
10.7# 95.31 11.67 2.22 2.51 0.050 
16.7# 96.84 12.94 2.19 2.51 0.057 
22.2 94.96 11.52 2.22 2.51 0.049 
28.2* 74.03 15.62 2.11 2.50 0.055 
36.5* 95.47 12.80 2.21 2.53 0.055 
* large amount of water condensed in container 
# contains fracture on side surface

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-31 September 2002 
Table 6.3.2.5-2. Laboratory Measurement of Wet-Drilled Cores from DST Boreholes (81, 52, 53, 56) 
(continued) 
Borehole #56, ESF-HD-CHE-5 
sample location saturation porosity bulk density particle density gravimetric 
water content 
(m) (%) (%) (g/cc) (g/cc) (g/g) 
10.6 94.99 14.57 2.15 2.52 0.064 
18.0* 94.34 12.33 2.20 2.51 0.053 
23.2 95.58 16.02 2.11 2.51 0.072 
29.6 92.79 15.91 2.14 2.54 0.069 
35.7 86.21 11.65 2.21 2.51 0.045 
38.9 82.40 10.09 2.25 2.51 0.037 
* contains fracture on side surface 
Borehole Summary 
saturation porosity bulk density particle density gravimetric 
water content 
(%) (%) (g/cc) (g/cc) (g/g) 
average 93.15 12.54 2.20 2.51 0.053 
standard 
deviation 
5.93 2.75 0.06 0.01 0.015 
Table 6.3.2.5-3. DST Samples Prepared for Electrical Properties Measurements 
* Statistical mean for 10 samples. Errors represent one standard deviation for all samples collectively.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-32 September 2002 
Table 6.3.3.1-1. Summary of SNL-Installed Measurement System Specifications for the DST 
Measurement System Manufacturer Gage Range, Accuracy Comments 
Type-K Thermocouples Watlow 
ARI, Inc. (probes) 
Range: max 1280C 
Accuracy:  2.2C 
Chromel- 
Alumel 
Vibrating Wire Displacement 
Transducers 
GEOKON 1 in. ( 25.4 mm) full range 
Accuracy: 0.02% of full range 
High Temperature LVDTs 
(Heated Drift) 
RDP Electrosense, 
Inc. 
 1 in. ( 25.4 mm) full range 
Accuracy of 0.5% linearity full range 
(linear within range; i.e. 0.5% of 
measured value) 
calibrated from ambient to 350C 
AC-LVDTs 
Table 6.3.3.2-1. Location and Quality Information for CDEX-1 and CDEX-2 
Instrument ID X (m) Y (m) Z (m) General Quality of Data 
ESF-HD-CDEX-1 
(vertical) 
0.425 42.357 2.01 Good data until Day 450 (2/26/1999); unexplainable rise in 
displacement through Day 650 (9/14/1999) which may or may not 
be real; oscillating high level of displacement (17.5-20.5 mm) 
through heater turn-off which is probably bad data; observation by 
Tim Vogt (M&O) that time-averaged oscillation matches annual 
climatic cycle. 
ESF-HD-CDEX-2 
(horizontal) 
2.047 42.269 -0.016 Occasional electrical noise  overall very good 
Table 6.3.3.3-1. Summary of SNL-Installed Strain Gage Specifications for the DST 
Measurement System Manufacturer Gage Range, Accuracy 
CIP Strain Gages BLH Electronics Karma Foil 4-in gages with gage factor of 2 
Temperature range limited by bonding epoxy and 
extension wire

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-33 September 2002 
Table 6.3.3.4-1. Description of DST AE Accelerometers 
Channel Borehole 
Number 
S/N Model X (m) Y(m) Z(m) Distance from Borehole 
Collar 
1 163 3032 728-T 9.24 22.66 -9.35 10.95 
2 171 3034 728-T -9.47 39.30 9.50 10.82 
3 139 2019 793-6 -21.87 11.95 0.14 19.30 
4 161 2890 728-T -8.54 23.05 -8.46 9.75 
5 175 3037 728-T 10.23 39.23 10.43 11.98 
6 140 2883 728-T -10.12 11.85 -8.54 10.75 
7 144 2886 728-T 9.26 11.98 9.23 10.25 
8 159 2889 728-T -9.67 22.88 9.74 10.98 
9 142 2884 728-T 9.78 11.91 -9.74 11.50 
10 164 2022 793-6 12.49 22.94 0.16 10.00 
11 138 2881 728-T -9.06 11.70 9.03 10.00 
12 143 2020 793-6 21.71 11.92 0.02 19.05 
13 160 2021 793-6 -11.99 22.91 0.05 9.49 
14 165 3033 728-T 10.36 22.79 10.38 12.01 
15 172 3035 728-T -8.47 39.09 -8.47 9.75 
16 174 3036 728-T 9.80 39.10 -9.27 11.25 
Table 6.3.3.4-2. Corresponding AE and MPBX Events 
DST Coordinate System Days after heater 
activation 
Date/Time (UTC) 
Data Type Occurrence X Y Z 
AE 6_1 -1.340 22.780 2.520 442.39 02/19/1999 04:03 
MPBX HD-156-MPBX9-2 -0.007 20.993 4.604 442.98 02/19/1999 18:06

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-34 September 2002 
Table 6.3.3.5-1. Summary of Thermal Expansion Data for Specimens from the DST Block for the First 
Heating Cycle 
MCTE on Heat-up (10-6/.C) 
Temp. 
(.C) 
25- 
50 
50- 
75 
75- 
100 
100- 
125 
125- 
150 
150- 
175 
175- 
200 
200- 
225 
225- 
250 
250- 
275 
275- 
300 
300- 
325 
N(a) = 
Mean = 
STD(a) = 
95% (a) 
17 
7.34 
0.57 
0.27 
17 
8.99 
0.47 
0.22 
17 
9.73 
0.54 
0.26 
17 
10.22 
0.58 
0.28 
17 
10.91 
0.79 
0.38 
17 
12.20 
1.04 
0.49 
17 
14.74 
4.79 
2.28 
17 
22.31 
18.09 
8.60 
17 
27.34 
15.70 
7.46 
17 
33.88 
6.94 
3.30 
17 
54.13 
12.18 
5.79 
13 
52.28 
13.42 
7.29 
(a)N = Number of samples; STD = Standard deviation; 95% = 95 percent confidence limit. 
Table 6.3.3.5-2. Summary of the Mean Thermal Expansion Coefficients for Specimens from DST Block 
for the First Cooling Cycle 
Mean CTE on Cool-Down (10-6/C) 
Temp. (C) 325-300 300-275 275-250 250-225 225-200 200-175 175-150 150-125 125-100 100-75 75-50 50-30 
N(a) = 13 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 16 15 
Mean = 15.74 24.07 35.63 36.01 26.50 24.19 18.30 14.14 12.36 11.05 10.24 9.67 
STD(a) = 1.88 5.70 8.39 8.32 4.69 9.82 7.37 2.61 1.76 0.84 1.24 0.66 
95% (a) 1.02 2.71 3.99 3.96 2.23 4.67 3.50 1.24 0.84 0.40 0.61 0.33 
(a) N = Number of samples; STD = Standard deviation 
Table 6.3.3.5-3. Tabulation of DST Unconfined Compression Tests 
Statistical Summary (a) 
All specimens TSw2, Tptpmn Mean Standard 
Deviation 
Count 95% Confidence 
Limit 
Static Young's Modulus (GPa) 36.8 3.5 16 1.7 
Static Poisson's Ratio 0.201 0.040 16 0.020 
Unconfined Compressive 
Strength (MPa) 
176.4 65.8 16 32.3 
Axial Strain at Peak Stress 0.005209 0.002048 16 0.001004 
Test Conditions: Nominally 38.1 mm in diameter, 76.2 mm in length, ambient temperature and 
pressure, nominal strain rate of 10-5 s-1. 
NOTE: (a) Test specimen ESF-SDM-MPBX1-1.0-A was tested twice. Mean Young's modulus 
and mean Poisson's ration were calculated using data from the first loading only 
(UCDST001). Mean unconfined compressive strength was calculated using data from 
the second loading only (UCDST017).

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-35 September 2002 
Table 6.3.3.5-4. Summary of Results for DST Reinforced Concrete 
Strength 
(MPa) 
Youngs 
Modulus 
(GPa) 
Poissons 
Ratio 
(0) 
Poissons 
Ratio 
(90) 
Loading Unloading Loading Unloading Loading Unloading 
Tests to Failure 
CIP11 58.2 31.4 (a) 0.197 
CIP13 58.6 37.3 0.293 0.253 
CIP17 52.9 34.4 0.247 0.233 
Cyclic Loading Tests 
CIP14 
Cycle 1: 31.3 34.9 0.301 0.276 0.292 0.267 
Cycle 2: 32.2 34.4 0.254 0.281 0.244 0.274 
Cycle 3: 31.5 34.1 0.254 0.278 0.242 0.269 
Cycle 4: 31.7 33.3 0.252 0.250 0.238 0.217 
CIP18 
Cycle 1: 32.3 34.5 0.222 0.208 0.261 0.261 
Cycle 2: 35.2 34.3 0.228 0.210 0.255 0.266 
Cycle 3: 35.3 32.8 0.230 0.205 0.255 0.257 
Mean 33.3 34.0 0.253 0.244 0.247 0.259 
Standard Deviation 2.1 0.7 0.027 0.036 0.024 0.019 
No. of Measurements 10 7 9 7 10 7 
Mean (All Data) 56.6 33.6 0.249 0.252 
Standard Deviation 3.2 1.7 0.031 0.022 
No. of Measurements 3 17 16 17 
(a) Radial gage did not function properly so data are omitted.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-36 September 2002 
Table 6.3.3.5-5. Summary of Results for Nonreinforced Concrete 
Strength 
(MPa) 
Youngs 
Modulus 
(GPa) 
Poissons 
Ratio 
(0) 
Poissons 
Ratio 
(90) 
Loading Unloading Loading Unloading Loading Unloading 
Tests to Failure 
CIP7 62.89 36.8 (a) 0.210 
CIP8 61.60 36.8 (a) 0.235 
CIP10 38.33 45.0 (b) 0.153 0.288 
Cyclic Loading Tests 
CIP9 
Cycle 1: 38.4 38.6 0.252 0.236 0.243 0.260 
Cycle 2: 41.7 41.1 0.272 0.256 0.278 0.284 
Cycle 3: 42.2 42.2 0.297 0.264 0.306 0.289 
Cycle 4: 42.3 42.8 0.274 0.271 0.271 0.307 
CIP3 
Cycle 1: 32.0 34.5 0.226 0.238 0.179 0.177 
Cycle 2: 36.2 34.3 0.239 0.242 0.205 0.171 
Cycle 3: 36.5 32.5 0.233 0.231 0.206 0.180 
Mean 38.8 38.0 0.243 0.248 0.242 0.238 
Standard Deviation 3.9 4.2 0.043 0.016 0.042 0.060 
No. of Measurements 10 7 8 7 10 7 
Mean (All Data) 54.3 38.5 0.246 0.241 
Standard Deviation 13.8 3.9 0.032 0.049 
No. of Measurements 3 17 15 17 
(a) Radial gage did not function properly so data are omitted. 
(b) CIP10 had a lower strength than CIP7 and CIP8. Because moduli are calculated between 50 microstrain and 
40% of the failure strength, the moduli for CIP10 were determined over a lower stress range than CIP7 and CIP8

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-37 September 2002 
Table 6.3.3.6-1. DST PLT Results from October 2000 
Maximum 
Displacement 
(mm) 
Secant Moduli 
(GPa) 
Elastic Moduli 
(GPa) 
Ambient Side 
Deep Anchor 1.69 17.3 41.0 
Medium Anchor 1.49 19.6 49.5 
Shallow Anchor 1.21 24.2 59.4 
Elevated Temp. 
Deep Anchor LVDT malfunctioned LVDT malfunctioned LVDT malfunctioned 
Medium Anchor .68 43 62.5 
Shallow Anchor .55 53.2 99.0 
NOTE: Maximum pressure equals 31.75 MPa.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-38 September 2002 
Table 6.3.3.6-2. Rock Mass Rating Q for the Thermal Test Facility 
Start 
Station 
End 
Station 
Record 
Number 
Revision 
Number 
Stratigraphic 
Unit 
RQD Jn Jr Ja Jw SRF Q 
Observation Drift 
5 10 1 0 Tptpmn 88.6 12 4.0 1.0 1 5.0 5.907 
10 15 11 0 Tptpmn 81.8 12 4.0 1.0 1 5.0 5.453 
15 20 2 0 Tptpmn 89.1 12 4.0 1.0 1 5.0 5.940 
20 25 3 0 Tptpmn 87.7 6 4.0 1.0 1 5.0 11.693 
25 30 4 0 Tptpmn 95.7 12 4.0 1.0 1 1.0 31.900 
30 35 5 0 Tptpmn 71.2 12 4.0 4.0 1 5.0 1.187 
35 40 6 0 Tptpmn 73.9 12 4.0 4.0 1. 5.0 1.232 
40 45 7 0 Tptpmn 63.8 12 4.0 1.0 1 5.0 4.253 * 
45 50 8 0 Tptpmn 92.6 12 4.0 3.0 1 5.0 2.058 * 
50 55 9 0 Tptpmn 94.3 12 4.0 3.0 1 5.0 2.096 * 
55 60 10 0 Tptpmn 92.7 12 4.0 3.0 1 5.0 2.060 * 
60 65 12 0 Tptpmn 85.6 12 4.0 3.0 1 5.0 1.902 
65 70 13 0 Tptpmn 87.6 12 4.0 3.0 1 5.0 1.947 
70 75 14 0 Tptpmn 91.7 15 3.3 3.0 1 5.0 1.345 ** 
75 80 15 0 Tptpmn 75.7 12 4.0 3.0 1 5.0 1.682 ** 
80 85 16 0 Tptpmn 97.6 6 2.3 3.0 1 5.0 2.494 ** 
85 90 17 0 Tptpmn 73.0 12 4.0 3.0 1 5.0 1.622 ** 
90 95 18 0 Tptpmn 83.7 20 4.0 3.0 1 5.0 1.116 ** 
95 100 19 0 Tptpmn 99.0 20 4.0 3.0 1 5.0 1.320 ** 
100 105 20 0 Tptpmn 92.7 12 4.0 3.0 1 7.5 1.373 ** 
105 110 21 0 Tptpmn 49.5 6 4.0 3.0 1 7.5 1.467 ** 
110 115 22 0 Tptpmn 79.5 12 2.4 3.0 1 7.5 0.707 ** 
115 120 23 0 Tptpmn 87.2 12 4.0 3.0 1 7.5 1.292 ** 
120 125 24 0 Tptpmn 88.7 20 4.0 3.0 1 7.5 0.788 ** 
125 130 25 0 Tptpmn 67.7 6 4.0 3.0 1 7.5 2.006 ** 
130 135 26 0 Tptpmn 51.4 12 4.0 3.0 1 7.5 0.761 
* Interval adjacent to the single heater block. 
** Interval adjacent to the heated drift. 
RQD Rock Quality Designation 
Jn Joint Set Number 
Jr Joint Roughness Number 
Ja Joint Alteration Number 
Jw Joint Water Reduction Factor 
SRF Stress Reduction Factor 
Q Rock Mass Quality Indices

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-39 September 2002 
Table 6.3.3.6-3. Rock Mass Rating RMR for the Thermal Test Facility 
Start 
Station 
End 
Station 
Record 
Number 
Revision 
Number 
Stratigraphic 
Unit 
RQD-1 C Js Jc Jw JOA RMR 
Observation Drift 
5 10 1 0 Tptpmn 17 12 15 21.1 15 -5 75.1 
10 15 11 0 Tptpmn 17 12 15 21.1 15 -5 75.1 
15 20 2 0 Tptpmn 17 12 15 22.4 15 -5 76.4 
20 25 3 0 Tptpmn 17 12 15 23.6 15 -5 77.6 
25 30 4 0 Tptpmn 20 12 15 23.6 15 -5 80.6 
30 35 5 0 Tptpmn 13 12 8 24.9 15 -5 67.9 
35 40 6 0 Tptpmn 13 12 8 23.6 15 -5 66.6 
40 45 7 0 Tptpmn 13 12 15 21.1 15 -5 71.1 * 
45 50 8 0 Tptpmn 20 12 10 22.4 15 -5 74.4 * 
50 55 9 0 Tptpmn 20 12 10 22.4 15 -5 74.4 * 
55 60 10 0 Tptpmn 20 12 15 22.4 15 -5 79.4 * 
60 65 12 0 Tptpmn 17 12 15 21.1 15 -5 75.1 
65 70 13 0 Tptpmn 17 12 15 22.4 15 -5 76.4 
70 75 14 0 Tptpmn 20 12 20 20.1 15 -12 75.1 ** 
75 80 15 0 Tptpmn 17 12 15 21.1 15 -5 75.1 ** 
80 85 16 0 Tptpmn 20 12 20 20.1 15 -12 75.1 ** 
85 90 17 0 Tptpmn 13 12 10 22.4 15 -12 60.4 ** 
90 95 18 0 Tptpmn 17 12 15 21.1 15 -5 75.1 ** 
95 100 19 0 Tptpmn 20 12 20 21.1 15 -12 76.1 ** 
100 105 20 0 Tptpmn 20 12 8 20.1 15 -12 63.1 ** 
105 110 21 0 Tptpmn 8 12 8 20.1 15 -12 51.1 ** 
110 115 22 0 Tptpmn 17 12 8 21.3 15 -12 61.3 ** 
115 120 23 0 Tptpmn 17 12 15 20.1 15 -5 74.1 ** 
120 125 24 0 Tptpmn 17 12 15 21.1 15 -5 75.1 ** 
125 130 25 0 Tptpmn 13 12 5 22.4 15 -12 55.4 ** 
130 135 26 0 Tptpmn 13 12 10 21.1 15 -5 66.1 
* Interval adjacent to the single heater block. 
** Interval adjacent to the heated drift. 
RQD Rock Quality Designation Rating 
C Intact Rock Strength Rating 
Js Joint Spacing Rating 
Jc Joint Condition Rating 
Jw Ground Water Rating 
JOA Joint Orientation Adjustment 
RMR Rock Mass Rating

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-40 September 2002 
Table 6.3.3.6-4. RMR Indices for Topopah Spring Middle Non-Lithophysal Zone (TSw2) 
RMR 
(Average) 
RMR 
(Standard Deviation) 
N 
(Number of Samples) 
Thermal Test Facility 74.1 9.1 33 
Main Drift 63.7 7.0 718 
Table 6.3.3.6-5. Rock Mass Thermal Expansion Coefficients from DST MPBX Data 
Thermal expansion coefficients in strain/C 
Tmax, C 25C- 
50C 
50C- 
75C 
75C- 
100C 
100C- 
125C 
125C- 
150C 
150C- 
175C 
175C- 
200C 
DST MPBX data through 1/14/2002 
HD-81-MPBX1 
Anc 4-Anc 5 
178.02 1.94 3.27 4.61 3.98 7.02 9.47 12.55 
HD-81-MPBX1 
Anc 5-Anc 6 
171.74 3.65 1.19 0.46 4.37 7.04 10.34 
HD-82-MPBX2 
Anc 2-Anc 3 
158.24 0.48 2.78 6.84 4.89 7.21 8.40 
HD-82-MPBX2 
Anc 3-Anc 4 
163.03 2.82 1.36 4.52 6.12 8.15 10.23 
HD-82-MPBX2 
Anc 4-Anc 5 
168.72 0.55 3.31 4.66 6.17 7.81 9.79 
HD-82-MPBX2 
Anc 5-Anc 6 
171.48 2.76 2.57 4.03 0.85 7.38 10.60 
Avg., DST MPBX 2.03 2.41 4.19 4.40 7.43 9.80 12.55 
Std. Dev., DST 
MPBX 
1.29 0.93 2.07 1.95 0.46 0.80 
Avg., DST MPBX 
(no outliers) 
2.03 2.41 4.45 5.11 7.43 9.80 12.55 
Std. Dev., DST 
MPBX (no outliers) 
1.29 0.93 0.29 1.00 0.46 0.80 
SHT Pre-Heating 
Heat. (TDIF 
305593) 
300 7.47 8.88 9.64 10.01 10.72 11.26 12.78 
SHT Post-Cooling 
1st Heat. (TDIF 
307112) 
322 8.6 9.9 9.0 9.6 10.6 11.8 12.3 
SHT Post-Cooling 
2nd Heat. (TDIF 
307112) 
323 8.5 9.7 9.0 10.2 11.1 12.2 14.1 
DST Pre-Heating 
1st Heat. (TDIF 
306127) 
327 7.34 8.99 9.73 10.22 10.91 12.20 14.74 
DST Pre-Heating 
2nd Heat. (TDIF 
306127) 
328 7.22 8.87 9.63 10.24 11.28 13.22 19.37

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-41 September 2002 
Table 6.3.4.1-1. Summary of DST Water Samples, the Field Data, and Important Observations through 
January 14, 2002 
Date Approx. 
Start 
Time 
Approx. 
Finish 
Time 
Est. 
Volume 
(mL) 
Collection 
Hole/Zone 
pH Electrical 
Conductivity 
(mS/cm) 
Total 
Dissolved 
Solids (ppm) 
Sample Number Solution 
Temp. (C) 
Comments 
06/04/98 9:30 500 60/2 7.5 SPC00527968 anion 
06/04/98 9:30 500 60/2 7.5 SPC00527969 metals 
06/04/98 9:30 500 60/2 7.5 SPC00527970 O, H, & C 
06/04/98 9:30 500 60/2 7.5 SPC00527971 Tritium 
06/04/98 9:30 500 60/2 7.5 SPC00527972 U, Sr 
06/04/98 9:30 500 60/2 7.5 SPC00527973 U, Sr 
06/04/98 9:30 500 60/2 7.5 SPC00527974 36CI 
06/04/98 9:30 2200 60/2 7.5 SPC00527975 Surplus H2O 
06/04/98 10:45 250 60/3 7.7 SPC00527977 
08/12/98 8:23 8:50 125 60/2 6.9 SPC00527915 
08/12/98 8:51 9:10 900 60/3 6.8 SPC00527916 
08/12/98 9:49 10:07 200 77/3 5.5 SPC00527917 
11/12/98 9:53 10:04 100 59/4 6.6 SPC00541803 25 Color noted as yellow 
by lab report 
11/12/98 10:22 11:42 4000 60/3 6.9 SPC00541804 26.5 - 49.6 
11/12/98 13:37 14:04 3000 186/3 6.8 SPC00541805 34.3 - 35.1 
01/26/99 10:20 10:29 25 59/4 SPC00504397 Not Filtered 
01/26/99 9:11 9:14 2000 60/3 7.36-7.44 140-141 SPC00504396 52 est. 3.5 L pumped, 
not filtered 
01/26/99 11:33 11:50 800 186/3 7.24-7.17 320 SPC00527961 Not Filtered 
03/30/99 9:50 10:10 700 60/3 8.0 SPC00529637 
03/30/99 12:40 200 77/3 7.0 SPC00529634 31 
04/20/99 9:00 9:32 175 60/3 4.19-4.50 30 SPC00551100 32-41 
04/20/99 12:00 13:45 500 60/3 4.8 10 SPC00551103 40 
04/20/99 9:15 10:07 375 BH80 6.39-6.72 30-50 SPC00551102 64 
05/10/99 10:20 40* 60/3 4.78-4.80 12.4 7.98 SPC00551104 21.1-24.0* 
05/10/99 10:24 40* 60/3 4.68 11.37 7.09 SPC00551105 34.8-36.3* 
05/10/99 10:10 10:29 175* 60/3 4.68-4.80* SPC00551106 21.1-36.3* 100 mL used for 
alkalilinity 
05/10/99 11:04 40* 60/3 4.84 9.67-8.72 6.01-5.38 SPC00551107 35.3-41.3* Conductivity & TDS 
represent pre - post 
filtration 
05/25/99 9:40 40* 60/3 4.75 11.74 7.43 SPC00551111 26.4-27.3* 
05/25/99 9:23 40* 60/3 4.68 16.07 10.18 SPC00551110 24.1-25.6* 
05/25/99 9:10 9:50 150* 60/3 4.68-4.75* SPC00551151 24.1-27.3* 100 mL used for 
alkalilinity 
05/25/99 10:04 40* 60/3 4.75 9.37 5.92 SPC00551112 24.8* 
06/24/99 9:17 40* 60/3 5.02 8.84 SPC00551154 27.5* 
06/24/99 9:25 9:55 170* 60/3 5.08* SPC00551157 28.9* 100 mL used for 
alkalilinity 
06/24/99 9:25 9:27 40* 60/3 5.08 SPC00551156 28.9* 
10/27/99 12:54 150* 59/2 5.93 113.4 SPC00557028* 43.4* 
10/27/99 13:03 50* 59/2 6.08 110.2 SPC00557029* 52* 
10/27/99 13:27 250* 59/3 6.64 203.1 SPC00557035* 60.2* 
10/27/99 13:45 40* 59/3 6.81 192.3 118.1 SPC00557036* 62.3* 
10/27/99 14:27 50* 76/3 6.14-6.46 SPC00557039* 28.7* 
11/30/99 10:21 50* 59/2 7.53 80.8 52.84 SPC00557082* 39.5* 
11/30/99 10:24 150* 59/2 7.24 69.14 43.9 SPC00557080* 46.6* 
11/30/99 10:30 59/2 6.8 67.04 42.3 
11/30/99 10:38 40* 59/2 70.3 44.36 SPC00557083* 55.9* 
11/30/99 10:47 50* 59/3 7.06 105.2 65.86 SPC00557042* 47.3* 
11/30/99 10:50 150* 59/3 7.27 106.8 65.4 SPC00552575* 60* 
11/30/99 10:55 40* 59/3 7.47 112 63.8 SPC00557043* 68.4*

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-42 September 2002 
Table 6.3.4.1-1. Summary of DST Water Samples, the Field Data, and Important Observations through 
January 14, 2002 (continued) 
Date Approx. 
Start 
Time 
Approx. 
Finish 
Time 
Est. 
Volume 
(mL) 
Collection 
Hole/Zone 
pH Electrical 
Conductivity 
(mS/cm) 
Total 
Dissolved 
Solids (ppm) 
Sample Number Solution 
Temp. (C) 
Comments 
11/30/99 11:59 50* 76/3 7.04 307.2 198.6 SPC00552577* 37.7* 
11/30/99 12:03 150* 76/3 6.91 312.3 201.3 SPC00557085* 48.9* 
11/30/99 12:10 125* 76/3 6.86 317.7 199.4 SPC00552576* 57.9* 
11/30/99 12:20 40* 76/3 6.94 326.2 207.3 SPC00552579* 53.2* 
11/30/99 13:10 50* 77/3 4.68 156.4 9.99 SPC00557084* 45.2* Reported 
conductivity and TDS 
values are suspect. 
01/25/00 9:30 150* 59/2 7.43 104.7 67.1 SPC00550668* 27.1* 
01/25/00 9:33 150* 59/2 7.07 62.03 39.35 SPC00550669* 38.5* 
01/25/00 9:36 150* 59/2 6.85 63.01 39.31 SPC00550671* 51.5* 
01/25/00 9:45 59/2 6.68 61.21 37.89 57.5* 
01/25/00 11:35 50* 77/2 4.63 61.24 40.24 SPC00550672* 37* 
01/25/00 12:00 50* 77/3 3.47 224.9 145.5 SPC00550674* 36.8* 
05/23/00 11:58 150* 59/2 6.96 96.13 61.27 SPC00550680* 30.5* 
05/23/00 12:00 150* 59/2 6.95 98.55 61.91 SPC00550682* 42.6* 
05/23/00 12:15 59/2 6.96 99.73 61.76 60.4* 
05/23/00 12:26 120* 59/3 5.19 5.2 3.14 SPC00550687* 46.4* 
05/23/00 9:11 160* 76/3 6.92-6.96 134.8 86.86 SPC00550697* 21-40.8* 
06/29/00 11:20 59/2 6.81-6.92 100.3 62.73 47.2* 
06/29/00 11:24 59/2 7 111.7 68.4 58.4* 
06/29/00 11:27 59/2 6.99-7.08 79.9 49.12 50.9* 
06/29/00 11:45 59/3 5.39 4.39 2.74 40.4* 
06/29/00 11:50 59/3 5.6 4.7 2.91 45.9* 
06/29/00 12:00 59/4 4.6 13.72 8.48 50.2* 
06/29/00 12:03 59/4 4.74 14.83 9.21 49.2* 
06/29/00 9:35 76/3 5.75 13.81 8.64 35.8* 
06/29/00 9:46 76/4 4.74-4.77 12.85 7.99 34.4* 
06/29/00 10:10 78/2 4.12 35.64 20.44 32.8* 
06/29/00 10:18 78/3 4.22 28.54 17.78 42.1* 
08/21/00 10:46 10:52 20* 76/3 6.27-5.04 
08/21/00 10:52 11:02 15* 76/4 5.01-4.99 
08/21/00 11:03 11:10 10* 78/3 5.05-5.21 
01/23/01 12:00 12:03 100* 59/2 SPC00530399* Ultrameter problem, 
no pH, TDS 
01/23/01 12:00 12:03 100* 59/2 SPC00529636* Ultrameter problem, 
no pH, TDS 
01/23/01 12:00 12:03 100* 59/2 SPC00529635* Ultrameter problem, 
no pH, TDS 
01/23/01 12:00 12:03 90* 59/2 SPC00530398* Ultrameter problem, 
no pH, TDS 
01/23/01 12:13 12:15 60* 59/3 SPC00530316* Ultrameter problem, 
no pH, TDS 
01/23/01 12:13 12:15 60* 59/3 SPC00530314* Ultrameter problem, 
no pH, TDS 
01/23/01 12:13 12:15 60* 59/3 SPC00530313* Ultrameter problem, 
no pH, TDS 
01/23/01 12:13 12:15 60* 59/3 SPC00530397* Ultrameter problem, 
no pH, TDS 
01/23/01 12:30 12:35 30* 60/4 SPC00530318* Ultrameter problem, 
no pH, TDS 
04/17/01 10:10 10:25 120 59/2 4.9 6.6 10.4 SPC00559467 32 Preserved with HNO3 
04/17/01 10:10 10:25 100 59/2 5.3 6.7 4.2 SPC00559468 35 Preserved with HNO3 
04/17/01 10:40 10:50 200 59/3 6.0 54.2 34.7 SPC00559463 30 Preserved with HNO3 
04/17/01 10:40 10:50 100 59/3 5.8 30.6 19.0 SPC00559465 38 Preserved with HNO3 
04/17/01 11:15 11:30 200 59/4 5.2 9.8 6.1 SPC00559466 33 Preserved with HNO3

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-43 September 2002 
Table 6.3.4.1-1. Summary of DST Water Samples, the Field Data, and Important Observations through 
January 14, 2002 (continued) 
Date Approx. 
Start 
Time 
Approx. 
Finish 
Time 
Est. 
Volume 
(mL) 
Collection 
Hole/Zone 
pH Electrical 
Conductivity 
(mS/cm) 
Total 
Dissolved 
Solids (ppm) 
Sample Number Solution 
Temp. (C) 
Comments 
04/17/01 12:40 12:45 200 76/2 5.7 40.1 25.8 SPC00559460 29 
04/17/01 12:45 12:50 500 76/2 7.7 41.5 25.8 SPC00559464 43 Preserved with HNO3 
04/17/01 12:50 12:55 500 76/2 7.9 40.2 24.8 SPC00559461 48 
04/17/01 12:55 13:00 500 76/2 8.1 38.9 24.7 SPC00559462 33 
04/17/01 13:00 13:09 500 76/2 8.2 38.4 24.4 SPC00559459 29 
04/17/01 13:09 13:20 250 76/2 8.2 37.8 24.1 SPC00559458 30 
04/17/01 13:20 13:25 120 76/2 8.3 33.5 22.5 SPC00559456 33 
04/17/01 13:25 13:33 120 76/2 8.3 37.3 24.0 SPC00559457 31 
06/26/01 10 76/3 5.3 3.7 32 
06/26/01 11:40 11:55 80 76/4 5.5 11.2 6.7 SPC00559493 42 
06/26/01 12:10 12:20 25 78/2 5.3 5.2 3.2 SPC00559494 44 
06/26/01 12:25 12:35 25 78/3 5.0 5.2 3.4 SPC00559495 47 
06/26/01 12:40 12:50 25 78/4 5.0 6.7 4.0 SPC00559496 44 
06/27/01 10:40 10:50 240 59/2 5.2 6.1 3.6 SPC00559497 57 Preserved with HNO3 
06/27/01 10:50 11:25 500 59/2 5.1 4.5 2.6 SPC00559498 58 
06/27/01 11:25 12:10 500 59/2 5.2 4.2 2.5 SPC00559499 56 
06/27/01 12:10 12:40 100 59/2 5.6 6.4 3.8 SPC00559471 49 
06/27/01 12:40 13:15 500 59/2 5.1 4.6 2.7 SPC00559472 54 
06/27/01 13:15 13:35 25 59/2 5.5 4.5 3.1 SPC00559473 48 
06/27/01 13:35 14:20 500 59/2 5.2 4 2.4 SPC00559474 42 
06/28/01 12:30 12:50 100 59/3 4.9 8.3 5.1 SPC00559476 44 
06/28/01 9:20 12:00 400 BH-72 4.8 14.6 8.9 SPC00559475 55 Using flex-tubing and 
rods 
06/28/01 13:30 13:50 40 60/3 3.3 189 115.0 SPC00559477 35 
06/28/01 13:55 14:05 10 60/4 5.1 10.5 8.8 39 
08/07/01 5 76/3 5.2 4.1 2.5 48 
08/07/01 11:55 12:05 60 76/4 5.4 7.8 4.7 SPC00559454 61 
08/07/01 11:55 12:05 15 76/4 5.4 7.8 4.7 SPC00575214 61 
08/07/01 12:15 12:25 100 77/2 3.3 284 173.0 SPC00559455 61 
08/07/01 12:15 12:25 15 77/2 3.3 284 173.0 SPC00575218 61 
08/07/01 12:35 12:45 60 77/3 3.3 231 138.0 SPC00559484 60 
08/07/01 12:35 12:45 15 77/3 3.3 231 138.0 SPC00575213 60 
08/07/01 12:55 13:05 30 78/2 4.5 8.8 5.2 SPC00559485 47 
08/07/01 5 78/3 5.2 9.1 5.6 40 
08/07/01 10 78/4 5.5 14.3 8.8 38 
08/08/01 10:30 10:50 500 59/2 5.4 2.2 1.3 SPC00559486 38 
08/08/01 10:30 10:50 15 59/2 5.4 2.2 1.3 SPC00575215 38 
08/08/01 11:00 11:40 200 59/3 4.9 6 3.6 SPC00559487 58 
08/08/01 11:00 11:40 15 59/3 4.9 6 3.6 SPC00575212 58 
08/08/01 11:50 12:05 200 59/4 5.1 2.8 1.6 SPC00559488 51 
08/08/01 11:50 12:05 15 59/4 5.1 2.8 1.6 SPC00575217 51 
08/08/01 5 60/1 4.8 25 15.0 35 
08/08/01 12:20 12:35 100 60/2 3.1 309 194.0 SPC00559490 52 
08/08/01 12:20 12:35 15 60/2 3.1 309 194.0 SPC00575216 52 
08/08/01 13:30 13:50 15 60/3 3.4 186 114.0 SPC00559491 56 
08/08/01 13:55 14:05 10 60/4 4.4 14.5 8.8 41 
10/22/01 10:30 10:40 50 76/3 5.2 8.4 5.1 SPC00575220 42 
10/22/01 10:45 10:55 30 76/4 5.1 5.2 3.0 SPC00575222 62 
10/22/01 11:05 11:15 100 77/2 3.1 403 245.0 SPC00575226 53 
10/22/01 11:20 11:30 30 77/3 3.2 344 208.0 SPC00575223 58 
10/22/01 5 78/1 4.2 11.6 6.9 57

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-44 September 2002 
Table 6.3.4.1-1. Summary of DST Water Samples, the Field Data, and Important Observations through 
January 14, 2002 (continued) 
Date Approx. 
Start 
Time 
Approx. 
Finish 
Time 
Est. 
Volume 
(mL) 
Collection 
Hole/Zone 
pH Electrical 
Conductivity 
(mS/cm) 
Total 
Dissolved 
Solids (ppm) 
Sample Number Solution 
Temp. (C) 
Comments 
10/22/01 5 78/2 4.8 5.6 3.3 52 
10/22/01 10 78/3 5.0 7.7 4.5 59 
10/22/01 10 78/4 5.4 10 6.0 53 
10/22/01 10:30 10:50 100 59/2 4.9 8.5 5.2 SPC00575227 52 
10/22/01 10 59/3 5.0 5.2 3.0 57 
10/22/01 10 59/4 4.9 6 3.5 61 
10/22/01 12:50 13:00 80 60/2 3.2 406 252.0 SPC00575225 56 
10/22/01 13:10 13:20 30 60/3 3.5 151 90.0 SPC00575221 56 
10/22/01 13:25 13:35 40 60/4 3.8 63 38.0 SPC00575224 49 
10/22/01 5 61/1 4.4 14.6 8.7 51 
10/22/01 10 61/3 4.9 7.9 4.8 45 
10/22/01 10 61/4 5.0 7.1 4.3 52 
11/08/01 14:45 15:10 50 BH 72 5.1 20.0 12.5 SPC00575228 28 HF Experiment 
11/08/01 BH 72 5.5 17.5 10.8 27 HF Experiment 
11/15/01 11:00 12:15 20 BH 55 7.5 279.0 176.0 SPC00575231 23 HF Experiment 
11/21/01 100 SPC00559482 HF Exp., rinse of flex 
tubing 
11/21/01 4 BH 55 SPC00559483 HF Experiment-not 
filtered 
11/26/01 9:50 10:30 100 BH 72 5.3 13.8 8.6 SPC00575219 25 HF Experiment 
11/26/01 13:10 15:10 20 BH 55 5.0 20.5 12.8 SPC00575229 24 HF Experiment 
11/29/01 10:30 11:00 100 BH 72 3.8 39.7 24.3 SPC00559478 39 HF Experiment 
11/29/01 10:30 11:00 BH 72 3.8 41.4 25.3 40 HF Experiment 
11/29/01 11:30 14:30 13 BH 55 5.2 SPC00559479 HF Experiment 
12/05/01 12:00 13:00 200 BH 72 3.5 111.5 70.6 SPC01016065 21 HF Experiment 
12/05/01 12:00 13:00 BH 72 3.4 167.3 106.0 32 HF Experiment 
12/05/01 12:00 13:00 500 BH 72 3.4 135.0 85.4 SPC01016066 20 HF Experiment 
12/05/01 11:00 15:10 10 BH 55 SPC01016067 HF Experiment 
01/07/02 2 BH 55 SPC01016084 HF Experiment 
01/07/02 11:30 11:40 500 76/2 7.8 30.2 18.0 SPC01016082 52 
01/07/02 11:30 11:40 15 76/2 7.8 30.2 18.0 SPC01014151 52 
01/07/02 11:40 11:50 50 76/3 4.9 7.3 4.3 SPC01016076 56 
01/07/02 11:40 11:50 15 76/3 4.9 7.3 4.3 SPC01014154 56 
01/07/02 11:50 12:00 30 76/4 4.8 5.5 3.2 SPC01016074 55 
01/07/02 11:50 12:00 15 76/4 4.8 5.5 3.2 SPC01016071 55 
01/07/02 12:15 12:25 30 78/2 5.1 4.9 2.9 SPC01016075 44 
01/07/02 12:15 12:25 15 78/2 5.1 4.9 2.9 SPC01016070 44 
01/07/02 12:25 12:35 30 78/3 4.9 5.1 3.1 SPC01016078 43 
01/07/02 12:25 12:35 15 78/3 4.9 5.1 3.1 SPC01014147 43 
01/07/02 12:40 12:50 40 78/4 4.9 5.4 3.2 SPC01016072 40 
01/07/02 12:40 12:50 15 78/4 4.9 5.4 3.2 SPC01014149 40 
01/07/02 13:05 13:20 400 59/2 5.2 3.3 2.0 SPC01016083 30 
01/07/02 13:05 13:20 15 59/2 5.2 3.3 2.0 SPC01014150 30 
01/07/02 13:20 13:35 250 59/3 5.3 2 1.2 SPC01016079 34 
01/07/02 13:20 13:35 15 59/3 5.3 2 1.2 SPC01014153 34 
01/07/02 13:40 13:50 40 59/4 4.8 5.7 3.5 SPC01016073 35 
01/07/02 13:40 13:50 15 59/4 4.8 5.7 3.5 SPC01014152 35 
01/07/02 14:00 14:10 50 61/2 5.5 6.5 4.0 SPC01016081 32 
01/07/02 14:00 14:10 15 61/2 5.5 6.5 4.0 SPC01014148 32 
01/07/02 14:15 14:25 40 61/3 5.2 4.8 2.9 SPC01016080 28 
01/07/02 14:15 14:25 15 61/3 5.2 4.8 2.9 SPC01016068 28

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-45 September 2002 
Table 6.3.4.1-1. Summary of DST Water Samples, the Field Data, and Important Observations through 
January 14, 2002 (continued) 
Date Approx. 
Start 
Time 
Approx. 
Finish 
Time 
Est. 
Volume 
(mL) 
Collection 
Hole/Zone 
pH Electrical 
Conductivity 
(mS/cm) 
Total 
Dissolved 
Solids (ppm) 
Sample Number Solution 
Temp. (C) 
Comments 
01/07/02 14:30 14:40 50 61/4 5.1 7.7 4.5 SPC01016077 33 
01/07/02 14:30 14:40 15 61/4 5.1 7.7 4.5 SPC01016069 33 
01/09/02 9:30 9:50 120 77/2 3.7 49.8 30.6 SPC01014156 41 
01/09/02 9:30 9:50 15 77/2 3.7 49.8 30.6 SPC01014159 41 
01/09/02 10:00 10:20 100 77/3 3.4 176 106.0 SPC01014155 54 
01/09/02 10:00 10:20 15 77/3 3.4 176 106.0 SPC01014158 54 
01/09/02 10:20 10:50 150 BH 72 3.3 85.8 54.9 SPC01014157 16 HF Exp. F.A. done 
on 1/16/02 
01/09/02 10:20 10:50 15 BH 72 3.3 85.8 54.9 SPC01014160 16 HF Exp. F.A. done 
on 1/16/02 
NOTES: 1) A single set of field measurements, in conjunction with multiple samples from a single borehole/zone, indicates that 
samples were split. 
2) Volumes and temperatures listed are included for information only. 
3) Small fluid volumes (<10mL) were depleted after conducting field measurements and not saved as samples. 
4) Blank cell indicates no measurement recorded. 
5) Asterisk indicates information source from Cho 2001 [159473].

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-46 September 2002 
Table 6.3.4.1-2. Chemical Analyses of DST Borehole Water Samples 
SMF No. (SPC0) 1002488 1002586 1002525 05279699 05279689 05279779 05279159 05279169 05279179 
Collection Date Pre-Htng. Pre-Htng. Pre-Htng. 06/04/98 06/04/98 06/04/98 08/12/98 08/12/98 08/12/98 
Collection Time 
Sample ID PERM-14 PERM-24 PERM-34 BH 60-2 BH 60-2 BH 60-3 BH 60-2 BH 60-3 BH 77-3 
Field pH 2 7.79 8.32 8.31 7.5 na 7.7 6.9 6.8 5.5 
Metals / Cations 
Na (mg/L) 60.5 61.0 61.5 20.0 na 24.0 20.4 17.2 2.4 
Si (mg/L) 37 31 35 56 na 41 51.8 43.5 1.48 
Ca (mg/L) 98.17 106.17 96.67 20 na 25 19.9 18.7 2.09 
K (mg/L) 6.0 7.0 9.0 6.0 na 4.5 5.4 4.5 1.4 
Mg (mg/L) 25.65 16.55 17.35 2.9 na 5.7 1.21 4.0 0.21 
Al (mg/L) < 0.06 < 0.06 < 0.06 0.12 na 0.017 5 < 0.06 0.003 5 < 0.06 
B (mg/L) 3.05 2.75 2.75 1.2 na 0.92 1.84 1.14 0.13 
S (mg/L) 42.25 38.6 38.65 5.5 na 9.2 4.5 5.2 1.4 
Fe (mg/L) < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02 0.04 na < 0.02 0.02 0.12 < 0.02 
Li (mg/L) 0.1 0.45 0.05 0.07 na 0.07 0.03 0.040 < 0.01 
Sr (mg/L) 1.4 1 1.05 0.18 na 0.34 0.11 2.21 0.05 
Anions 
HCO3 (mg/L)3 na na na na na na 
F (mg/L) 0.36 0.96 0.76 na 1.00 0.82 0.71 0.43 0.41 
Cl (mg/L) 122.73 109.93 123.13 na 10 16 6.14 5.52 2.15 
Br (mg/L) 0.6 0.76 1.2 na 0.84 0.73 0.05 0.21 0.03 
SO4 (mg/L) 124.18 111.38 119.78 na 17 30 4.88 8.81 1.86 
PO4 (mg/L) < 0.07 < 0.07 < 0.07 na < 0.07 < 0.07 0.25 0.16 1.06 
NO2 (mg/L) < 0.04 < 0.04 < 0.04 na < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.04 < 0.04 < 0.04 
NO3 (mg/L) 21.72 2.52 10.40 na 3.00 3.6 0.46 0.60 0.22 
SMF No. (SPC0) 05418039 05418036,9 05418049 05418046,9 05418059 05418056,9 05043979 05043969 05279619 
Collection Date 11/12/98 11/12/98 11/12/98 11/12/98 11/12/98 11/12/98 01/26/99 01/26/99 01/26/99 
Collection Time 
Sample ID BH 59-4 BH 59-4 BH 60-3 BH 60-3 BH 186-3 BH 186-3 BH 59-4 BH 60-3 BH 186-3 
Field pH 2 6.63 6.63 6.92 6.92 6.83 6.83 na 7.4 7.2 
Metals / Cations 
Na (mg/L) 22.6 135 10.1 20.3 105 17.0 219 19.1 25.9 
Si (mg/L) 33.5 44.2 60.0 53.8 16.0 27.2 12.0 65.0 49.3 
Ca (mg/L) 476 450 15.3 13.9 11.5 20.2 429 5.93 2.92 
K (mg/L) 29.5 37.8 8.7 7.8 3.5 3.9 29.7 4.1 5.9 
Mg (mg/L) 64.1 83.9 3.35 3.00 5.1 5.68 164 1.17 6.32 
Al (mg/L) 0.01 5 < 0.06 0.033 5 0.033 5 < 0.003 5 < 0.003 5 0.086 5 < 0.06 < 0.06 
B (mg/L) 4.47 4.13 1.58 1.41 0.51 0.58 6.68 1.75 0.84 
S (mg/L) 50.7 64.8 11.6 10.5 8.47 9.42 109 6.4 7.9 
Fe (mg/L) < 0.02 < 0.02 0.02 < 0.02 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02 0.09 
Li (mg/L) 0.21 0.20 0.040 0.040 0.05 0.05 0.33 0.02 0.05 
Sr (mg/L) 4.02 3.71 0.22 0.20 0.30 0.34 5.84 0.09 0.37 
Anions 
HCO3 (mg/L)3 na na na na na na na 41 116 
F (mg/L) 0.8 4.3 0.49 0.50 0.56 0.62 0.51 1.27 1.20 
Cl (mg/L) 1,130 1,250 19.5 19.6 18.7 18.6 1,160 10.3 23.3 
Br (mg/L) 1.13 < 0.07 0.6 0.51 0.67 0.60 1.51 0.15 0.32 
SO4 (mg/L) 226 213 30.6 30.8 26.3 26.2 240 13.5 21 
PO4 (mg/L) < 5 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.5 < 0.05 < 0.1 
NO2 (mg/L) < 3 < 10 < .10 < .10 < .1 < .1 < .3 < .03 < 0.05 
NO3 (mg/L) 3.12 7.81 3.38 3.17 7.47 7.27 11.6 2.56 6.73

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-47 September 2002 
Table 6.3.4.1-2. Chemical Analyses of DST Borehole Water Samples (continued) 
SMF No. (SPC0) 0529637-#19 0529637-#29 0529637-#39 05296349 05511009 05511039 05511049 05511059 05511069 
Collection Date 03/30/99 03/30/99 03/30/99 03/30/99 04/20/99 04/20/99 05/10/99 05/10/99 05/10/99 
Collection Time 9:50 AM 9:55 AM 10:10 AM 9:32 AM 1:45 PM 10:20 AM 10:24 AM 
Sample ID BH 60-3 BH 60-3 BH 60-3 BH 77-3 BH 60-3 BH 60-3 BH 60-3 BH 60-3 BH 60-3 
Field pH 2 8.0 na na 4.8 4.19-4.50 4.77 4.78-4.80 4.68 na 
Metals / Cations 
Na (mg/L) 11.2 11.0 2.2 < 0.2 0.14 < 0.05 1.8 2.5 0.15 
Si (mg/L) 62.8 59.8 12.1 1.03 0.7 < 0.5 1.1 1.2 0.6 
Ca (mg/L) 2.06 2.27 1.22 0.41 0.14 0.10 0.14 0.09 0.22 
K (mg/L) 2.4 2.4 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 
Mg (mg/L) 0.27 0.26 0.01 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 
Al (mg/L) 0.36, 0.27 5 0.36, 0.27 5 0.08, 0.07 5 0.005 5 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 
B (mg/L) 2.10 2.11 1.23 0.09 1.7 1.0 2.3 2.6 0.9 
S (mg/L) 1.83 1.82 0.42 < 0.02 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 
Fe (mg/L) < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02 0.05 0.02 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 
Li (mg/L) 0.02 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 4 < 4 < 4 < 4 < 4 
Sr (mg/L) 0.02 0.02 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05 
Anions 
HCO3 (mg/L)3 25.0 na na 1.25 na na na na 8.1 
F (mg/L) 1.02 0.97 0.11 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 
Cl (mg/L) 4.15 3.92 0.72 0.3 0.05 0.08 0.06 0.05 0.11 
Br (mg/L) < 0.04 < 0.04 < 0.04 < 0.04 < 0.03 < 0.03 < 0.03 < 0.03 < 0.03 
SO4 (mg/L) 3.83 3.75 0.79 0.13 0.1 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.08 
PO4 (mg/L) < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.02 < 0.02 0.92 0.84 0.62 
NO2 (mg/L) < 0.03 < 0.03 < 0.03 < 0.03 < 0.007 < 0.007 < 0.007 < 0.007 < 0.007 
NO3 (mg/L) 0.92 0.84 0.17 0.065 < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02 
SMF No. (SPC0) 0551107 05511109 05511119 05511549 05511559 05511599 05511609 05511699 05570299 
Collection Date 05/10/99 05/25/99 05/25/99 06/24/99 06/24/99 08/09/99 08/09/99 08/10/99 10/27/99 
Collection Time 11:04 AM 9:23 AM 9:40 AM 9:17 AM 9:23 AM 
Sample ID BH 60-3 BH 60-3 BH 60-3 BH 60-3 BH 60-3 BH 59-2(AC) BH 59-2(BC) BH 61-3 BH 59-2 
Field pH 2 4.84 4.68 4.75 5.02 na na na na na 
Metals / Cations 
Na (mg/L) 2.8 1.8 1.6 1.87 2.26 30 24 19 na 
Si (mg/L) 1.4 2.1 0.7 6.30 3.22 78 81 67 na 
Ca (mg/L) 0.15 0.13 0.09 0.69 0.23 47 39 14 na 
K (mg/L) < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 0.5 < 0.5 8 6 5 na 
Mg (mg/L) < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.012 < 0.005 13 11 3.2 na 
Al (mg/L) < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.04 < 0.04 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 na 
B (mg/L) 2.8 2.0 1.9 0.62 1.85 0.8 0.6 1.5 na 
S (mg/L) < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.1 < 0.1 22 17 3.1 na 
Fe (mg/L) 0.31 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 0.41 0.32 1.2 na 
Li (mg/L) < 4 < 4 < 4 < 1 < 1 < 4 < 4 < 4 na 
Sr (mg/L) < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.01 < 0.01 0.54 0.45 0.14 na 
Anions 
HCO3 (mg/L)3 na 8.6 8.6 na na na na na 23.5 
F (mg/L) < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.685 0.195 0.725 0.575 0.835 0.27 
Cl (mg/L) 0.09 0.20 0.06 0.615 0.305 88.3 71.0 24.1 9.5 
Br (mg/L) < 0.03 < 0.03 < 0.03 < 0.03 < 0.03 0.515 0.46 0.35 0.61 
SO4 (mg/L) 0.12 0.09 0.07 < 0.03 0.325 64.2 53.5 9.13 6.2 
PO4 (mg/L) < 0.02 0.69 0.33 < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02 
NO2 (mg/L) < 0.007 < 0.007 < 0.007 < 0.007 < 0.007 < 0.007 < 0.007 < 0.007 < 0.007 
NO3 (mg/L) < 0.02 < 0.02 < 0.02 na < 0.02 3.79 2.83 0.825 1.32

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-48 September 2002 
Table 6.3.4.1-2. Chemical Analyses of DST Borehole Water Samples (continued) 
SMF No. (SPC0) 0557032 05570339 05570369 05570389 05570409 0557080 0557081 0557083 0552575 0557043 
Collection Date 10/27/99 10/27/99 10/27/99 10/27/99 10/27/99 11/30/99 11/30/99 11/30/99 11/30/99 11/30/99 
Collection Time 
Sample ID BH 59-2 BH 59-2 BH 59-3 BH 59-3 BH 76-3 BH 59-2 BH 59-2 BH 59-2 BH 59-3 BH 59-3 
Field pH 2 5.93 6.08 na 6.64 6.14-6.46 6.86 7.24 na 7.47 na 
Metals / Cations 
Na (mg/L) 9.2 9.2 na 19.3 64.5 6.6 7.7 na 15.6 na 
Si (mg/L) 44.5 44.9 na 84.2 133.4 38.0 39.9 na 92.5 na 
Ca (mg/L) 7.53 7.47 na 13.2 59.5 4.33 5.63 na 2.86 na 
K (mg/L) 3.4 3.6 na 5.6 13.4 2.6 3.0 na 3.9 na 
Mg (mg/L) 1.81 1.72 na 1.49 13.8 1.02 1.38 na 0.29 na 
Al (mg/L) 0.033 7 0.033 7 na 0.040 0.010 0.030 0.030 na 0.071 na 
B (mg/L) 0.27 0.21 na 0.86 2.38 0.14 0.17 na 1.06 na 
S (mg/L) 2.52 2.50 na 14.48 34.55 0.76 1.33 na 3.25 na 
Fe (mg/L) 0.20 0.19 na < 0.02 < 0.02 0.09 0.14 na < 0.02 na 
Li (mg/L) 0.16 0.01 na 0.02 0.13 0.01 0.01 na 0.02 na 
Sr (mg/L) 0.11 0.08 na 0.13 0.78 0.06 0.08 na 0.03 na 
Anions 
HCO3 (mg/L)3 na 23.5 12.4 12.4 na na na 22.3 na 20.7 
F (mg/L) na 0.27 0.64 0.73 1.11 na na 0.35 na 1.3 
Cl (mg/L) na 9.1 12.9 12.9 81.9 na na 5.0 na 8.8 
Br (mg/L) na 0.58 0.89 0.51 0.97 na na < 0.03 na < 0.03 
SO4 (mg/L) na 6.3 40.7 40.3 94.6 na na 2.8 na 8.2 
PO4 (mg/L) na < 0.02 < 0.04 < 0.04 < 0.02 na na < 0.02 na < 0.02 
NO2 (mg/L) na < 0.007 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.007 na na < 0.007 na < 0.007 
NO3 (mg/L) na 1.40 3.06 3.05 6.42 na na < 0.02 na 2.4 
SMF No. (SPC0) 0552578 0552579 05570819 05570849 0557022 0550671 0550673 05506989 05506749 05506749 
Collection Date 11/30/99 11/30/99 11/30/99 11/30/99 01/25/00 01/25/00 01/25/00 01/25/00 01/25/00 01/25/00 
Collection Time 
Sample ID BH 76-3 BH 76-3 BH 77-3 BH 77-3 BH 59-2 BH 59-2 BH 59-2 BH 77-2 BH 77-3 BH 77-3 
Field pH 2 6.94 na na 4.68 7.07 6.68 na 4.63 3.47 na 
Metals / Cations 
Na (mg/L) 28.2 na na 0.6 8.1 6.6 na < 0.3 < 0.3 na 
Si (mg/L) 92.8 na na 2.45 42.8 41.7 na 2.0 2.5 na 
Ca (mg/L) 22.3 na na 1.27 7.54 2.89 na 0.17 < 0.005 na 
K (mg/L) 7.4 na na < 0.2 3.6 2.8 na < 0.2 < 0.2 na 
Mg (mg/L) 4.71 na na 0.19 1.78 0.72 na 0.01 < 0.005 na 
Al (mg/L) 0.031 na na 0.334 < 0.05 0.043 na 0.049 0.023 na 
B (mg/L) 0.81 na na 0.09 0.29 0.21 na 0.05 0.04 na 
S (mg/L) 9.46 na na 0.24 6.44 0.65 na < 0.05 < 0.05 na 
Fe (mg/L) 0.10 na na 0.37 0.07 < 0.02 na 0.25 0.07 na 
Li (mg/L) 0.04 na na < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 na < 0.01 < 0.01 na 
Sr (mg/L) 0.26 na na 0.02 0.091 0.036 na < 0.005 < 0.005 na 
Anions 
HCO3 (mg/L)3 na 82.3 na na na na 22.8 na na na 8 
F (mg/L) na 1.3 15 na na na 0.73 6.7 19.9 20.8 8 
Cl (mg/L) na 19 3.5 na na na 3.8 0.6 0.8 0.29 8 
Br (mg/L) na < 0.03 < 0.03 na na na < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 8 
SO4 (mg/L) na 26.0 1.6 na na na 1.8 0.39 < 0.1 < 0.1 8 
PO4 (mg/L) na < 0.02 < 0.02 na na na 0.62 0.64 4.0 2.9 8 
NO2 (mg/L) na < 0.007 < 0.007 na na na < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.06 8 
NO3 (mg/L) na 2.5 < 0.02 na na na 0.77 < 0.1 0.20 0.18 8

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-49 September 2002 
Table 6.3.4.1-2. Chemical Analyses of DST Borehole Water Samples (continued) 
SMF No. (SPC0) 0550681 0550682 0550684 0550687 0550697 0550679 0550693 0550694 0550691 
Collection Date 05/23/00 05/23/00 05/23/00 05/23/00 05/23/00 05/23/00 06/29/00 06/29/00 06/29/00 
Collection Time 
Sample ID BH 59-2 BH 59-2 BH 59-2 BH 59-3 BH 76-3 BH 76-4 BH 59-2 BH 59-2 BH 59-2 
Field pH 2 6.96 6.96 6.95 5.19 6.92-6.96 na 6.99-7.08 6.99-7.08 7.00 
Metals / Cations 
Na (mg/L) 17 18 17 < 2.4 29 < 2.4 16 15 < 4.8 
Si (mg/L) 59.4 59.2 59.3 < 0.46 96.0 3.4 62.7 57.5 36.3 
Ca (mg/L) 4.7 4.4 4.5 < 0.17 7.1 1.5 4.3 3.8 2.0 
K (mg/L) 4.3 4.4 4.4 < 0.095 6.5 0.70 4.7 4.2 2.5 
Mg (mg/L) 1.1 1.1 1.1 < 0.042 1.4 0.14 1.1 1.0 0.54 
Al (mg/L) < 0.053 < 0.053 < 0.053 < 0.053 < 0.053 < 0.053 < 0.053 < 0.053 < 0.11 
B (mg/L) na na na na na na na na na 
S (mg/L) na na na na na na na na na 
Fe (mg/L) < 0.038 < 0.038 < 0.038 < 0.038 < 0.038 < 0.038 < 0.038 < 0.038 < 0.076 
Li (mg/L) 0.021 0.022 0.021 < 0.0007 0.045 0.0037 0.019 0.018 0.010 
Sr (mg/L) < 0.013 < 0.013 < 0.013 < 0.013 < 0.013 < 0.013 < 0.013 < 0.013 < 0.026 
Anions 
HCO3 (mg/L)3 31.4 31.4 31.4 na na na na na na 
F (mg/L) 0.58 0.55 0.49 0.15 0.76 0.13 na na na 
Cl (mg/L) 10.15 10.6 10.15 0.07 14.5 2.75 na na na 
Br (mg/L) < 0.1 0.38 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 na na na 
SO4 (mg/L) 2.9 3.18 3.1 < 0.1 4.98 2.24 na na na 
PO4 (mg/L) < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 na na na 
NO2 (mg/L) < 0.06 < 0.06 < 0.06 < 0.06 < 0.06 < 0.06 na na na 
NO3 (mg/L) 0.56 0.54 0.71 0.38 1.47 0.85 na na na 
SMF No. (SPC0) 0550689 0550690 0550685 0550686 0530300 0530302 0550678 0530303 0550688 
Collection Date 06/29/00 06/29/00 06/29/00 06/29/00 06/29/00 06/29/00 06/29/00 06/29/00 06/29/00 
Collection Time 
Sample ID BH 59-2 BH 59-2 BH 59-4 BH 59-3 BH 76-3 BH 76-3 BH 76-4 BH 76-4 BH 78-2 
Field pH 2 na na 4.60-4.74 5.60 5.75 5.75 4.74-4.77 na 4.12 
Metals / Cations 
Na (mg/L) na na < 2.4 < 2.4 na < 2.4 < 2.4 na < 2.4 
Si (mg/L) na na < 0.46 < 0.46 na 3.1 < 0.46 na < 0.46 
Ca (mg/L) na na < 0.17 < 0.17 na < 0.17 < 0.17 na 0.5 
K (mg/L) na na < 0.095 < 0.095 na < 0.095 < 0.095 na < 0.095 
Mg (mg/L) na na < 0.042 < 0.042 na 0.29 < 0.042 na < 0.042 
Al (mg/L) na na < 0.053 < 0.053 na 0.17 0.18 na < 0.053 
B (mg/L) na na na na na na na na na 
S (mg/L) na na na na na na na na na 
Fe (mg/L) na na < 0.038 < 0.038 na < 0.038 < 0.038 na < 0.038 
Li (mg/L) na na < 0.0007 < 0.0007 na < 0.0007 < 0.0007 na < 0.0007 
Sr (mg/L) na na < 0.013 < 0.013 na < 0.013 < 0.013 na < 0.013 
Anions 
HCO3 (mg/L)3 29.4 29.4 na na na na na na na 
F (mg/L) 0.18 0.15 na na < 0.007 na na < 0.007 0.11 
Cl (mg/L) 0.90 0.32 na na 0.67 na na 0.94 2.79 
Br (mg/L) 0.62 0.48 na na 0.47 na na 0.57 1.15 
SO4 (mg/L) 0.5 0.42 na na 1.54 na na < 0.1 < 0.1 
PO4 (mg/L) < 0.2 < 0.2 na na < 0.2 na na < 0.2 < 0.2 
NO2 (mg/L) < 0.06 < 0.06 na na < 0.06 na na < 0.06 < 0.06 
NO3 (mg/L) 0.65 0.48 na na 0.49 na na < 0.09 < 0.09

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-50 September 2002 
Table 6.3.4.1-2. Chemical Analyses of DST Borehole Water Samples (continued) 
SMF No. (SPC0) 0550642 0530398 0530316 0530318 0559467 0559463 0559466 0559464 0559458 
Collection Date 06/29/00 01/23/01 01/23/01 01/23/01 04/17/01 04/17/01 04/17/01 04/17/01 04/17/01 
Collection Time 
Sample ID BH 78-3 BH 59-2 BH 59-3 BH 60-4 BH 59-2 BH 59-3 BH 59-4 BH 76-2 BH 76-2 
Field pH 2 4.22 na na na 4.87 5.96 5.20 7.68 8.22 
Metals / Cations 
Na (mg/L) < 2.4 29 < 2.4 < 2.4 < 2.4 6 < 2.4 9 9 
Si (mg/L) 2.3 84.5 < 0.46 46.1 5.2 < 0.46 < 0.46 42.6 44.1 
Ca (mg/L) 1.1 7.8 < 0.17 0.68 0.6 3.5 0.57 1.3 1.1 
K (mg/L) 0.2 5.8 < 0.053 < 0.095 0.33 0.35 < 0.095 1.6 1.6 
Mg (mg/L) 0.15 1.8 < 0.042 < 0.042 0.14 1.40 < 0.042 0.27 0.22 
Al (mg/L) 0.31 < 0.053 < 0.053 < 0.053 < 0.053 < 0.053 < 0.053 0.42 0.43 
B (mg/L) na na na na na na na na na 
S (mg/L) na na na na na na na na na 
Fe (mg/L) < 0.038 < 0.038 < 0.038 < 0.038 < 0.038 < 0.038 < 0.038 0.40 0.40 
Li (mg/L) < 0.0007 0.033 < 0.0007 < 0.0007 < 0.0007 < 0.0007 < 0.0007 0.0098 0.010 
Sr (mg/L) < 0.013 < 0.013 < 0.013 < 0.013 < 0.013 < 0.013 < 0.013 < 0.013 < 0.013 
Anions 
HCO3 (mg/L)3 na na na na na na na na na 
F (mg/L) < 0.007 0.78 < 0.007 0.35 na na na na 0.38 
Cl (mg/L) 1.39 25.20 0.26 0.55 na na na na 1.9 
Br (mg/L) 0.79 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 na na na na < 0.1 
SO4 (mg/L) < 0.1 9.5 < 0.1 0.57 na na na na 0.89 
PO4 (mg/L) < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 na na na na < 0.2 
NO2 (mg/L) < 0.06 < 0.06 < 0.06 0.59 na na na na < 0.06 
NO3 (mg/L) < 0.09 0.99 < 0.09 0.54 na na na na < 0.09 
SMF No. (SPC0) 0559456 0559481 0559477 0559455 0559455 0559484 0559484 0559490 0559491 
Collection Date 04/17/01 06/28/01 06/28/01 08/07/01 08/07/01 08/07/01 08/07/01 08/08/01 08/08/01 
Collection Time 
Sample ID BH 76-2 BH 60-3 BH 60-3 BH 77-2 BH 77-2 BH 77-3 BH 77-3 BH 60-2 BH 60-3 
Field pH 2 8.29 3.3 3.30 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.1 3.4 
Metals / Cations 
Na (mg/L) 9 < 2.4 na < 2.4 na < 2.4 na < 2.4 < 2.4 
Si (mg/L) 45.6 4.9 na 10.7 na 17.4 na 22.7 5.3 
Ca (mg/L) 1.3 < 0.17 na < 0.17 na < 0.17 na < 0.17 0.7 
K (mg/L) 1.9 < 0.095 na < 0.095 na < 0.095 na < 0.095 0.35 
Mg (mg/L) 0.23 < 0.042 na < 0.042 na < 0.042 na < 0.042 < 0.042 
Al (mg/L) 0.45 0.67 na 1.0 na 2.2 na 2.5 0.8 
B (mg/L) na na na na na na na na na 
S (mg/L) na na na na na na na na na 
Fe (mg/L) 0.39 0.15 na 0.20 na 0.19 na 1.6 < 0.038 
Li (mg/L) 0.0076 < 0.0007 na < 0.0007 na < 0.0007 na < 0.0007 < 0.0007 
Sr (mg/L) < 0.013 < 0.013 na < 0.013 na < 0.013 na < 0.013 < 0.013 
Anions 
HCO3 (mg/L)3 na na na < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 
F (mg/L) 0.47 na 17.7 41.0 50.0 50 57.8 66 8.77 
Cl (mg/L) 1.71 na 0.90 < 0.05 0.77 < 0.05 1.12 0.76 0.82 
Br (mg/L) < 0.1 na < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.2 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 
SO4 (mg/L) 0.85 na < 0.1 < 0.1 0.42 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 
PO4 (mg/L) < 0.2 na < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.3 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 
NO2 (mg/L) < 0.06 na < 0.06 < 0.06 < 0.1 < 0.06 < 0.06 < 0.06 < 0.06 
NO3 (mg/L) < 0.09 na < 0.09 0.60 0.69 0.48 0.21 < 0.09 < 0.09

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-51 September 2002 
Table 6.3.4.1-2. Chemical Analyses of DST Borehole Water Samples (continued) 
SMF No. (SPC0) 0575227 0575225 0575221 0575224 0575222 0575226 0575223 1016082 1014156 1014155 
Collection Date 10/22/01 10/22/01 10/22/01 10/22/01 10/22/01 10/22/01 10/22/01 01/07/02 01/09/02 01/09/02 
Collection Time 
Sample ID BH 59-2 BH 60-2 BH 60-3 BH 60-4 BH 76-4 BH 77-2 BH 77-3 BH 76-2 BH 77-2 BH 77-3 
Field pH 2 4.9 3.2 3.5 3.8 5.1 3.1 3.2 7.8 3.7 3.4 
Metals / Cations 
Na (mg/L) < 2.4 < 2.4 < 2.4 < 2.4 na < 2.4 < 2.4 na na na 
Si (mg/L) 1.7 10.3 10.9 22.9 na 3.6 2.60 na na na 
Ca (mg/L) 0.49 < 0.17 < 0.17 0.54 na 0.36 < 0.17 na na na 
K (mg/L) < 0.095 < 0.095 < 0.095 < 0.095 na 0.25 < 0.095 na na na 
Mg (mg/L) < 0.042 < 0.042 < 0.042 < 0.042 na < 0.042 < 0.042 na na na 
Al (mg/L) < 0.053 0.41 0.22 < 0.053 na 0.3 0.25 na na na 
B (mg/L) na na na na na na na na na na 
S (mg/L) na na na na na na na na na na 
Fe (mg/L) < 0.038 0.34 < 0.038 0.047 na 0.18 0.16 na na na 
Li (mg/L) <0.0007 <0.0007 <0.0007 <0.0007 na <0.0007 <0.0007 na na na 
Sr (mg/L) < 0.013 < 0.013 < 0.013 < 0.013 na < 0.01 < 0.013 na na na 
Anions 
HCO3 (mg/L)3 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 
F (mg/L) 0.27 74 na na <0.007 51 62 0.4 4.85 19 
Cl (mg/L) < 0.05 2.29 na na 0.41 0.75 0.7 2.75 0.63 0.89 
Br (mg/L) < 0.1 < 0.1 na na < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 
SO4 (mg/L) 0.16 0.08 na na 0.4 < 0.1 < 0.1 1.02 0.5 0.40 
PO4 (mg/L) < 0.2 < 0.2 na na < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 
NO2 (mg/L) < 0.06 < 0.06 na na < 0.06 < 0.06 < 0.06 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 
NO3 (mg/L) < 0.09 < 0.09 na na 0.06 < 0.09 0.50 < 0.2 < 0.2 0.30 
NOTE: 1 na = not available; < = not detected (less than "practical reporting limit"); Field chemistry of samples for 
high fluoride study (11/8/01 to 12/5/01) are reported in Tble 6.3.4.5-1 
2 see entry in Table 6.3.4.1-1 for temperature of pH measurements 
3 HCO3 - field measurement 
4 pore water samples (baseline): sample ultracentrifuged from borehole core 
5 low detection limit analysis - sample filtered to 0.10 mm and acidified 
6 sample filtered in the field and laboratory (LLNL) prior to analyses 
7 sample ID SPC0057028 submitted for low detection for AI analysis 
8 anion sample analyzed two different times 
9 analytical results are corroborating data (as defined in Section 3.6 of AP-SIII.3Q) and non-qualified

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-52 September 2002 
Table 6.3.4.2-1. Concentration and Isotopic Compositions of CO2 in Gas Samples Collected during the 
DST Heating Phase 
Sample Interval1 
(BH-Zone) 
YMP Tracking 
Number 
Date 
Sampled 
2CO2 
(v/v-%)2 
.13C ()3 .18O ()4 14C (fraction 
modern 
carbon) 
57-3 SPC 0052 7911 2/10/98 0.094 -13.8 31.2 
59-3 SPC 0052 7900 2/09/98 0.078 -10.3 31.9 
60-35 SPC 0052 7906 2/09/98 0.093 -8.0 22.9 
61-3 SPC 0052 7914 2/10/98 0.103 -11.6 30.2 
74-4 SPC 0052 7903 2/09/98 0.058 -11.2 32.9 
77-3 SPC 0052 7901 2/09/98 0.596 -5.5 48.3 
77-35 SPC 0052 7902 2/10/98 0.596 -7.4 24.1 
78-3 SPC 0052 7913 2/10/98 0.225 -11.3 30.7 0.400 
Heated Drift SPC 0052 7909 2/10/98 0.037 -10.3 32.3 
Observation Drift SPC 0052 7907 2/10/98 0.040 -10.3 40.0 
57-3 SPC 0052 7978 6/04/98 0.170 -16.6 29.5 
58-3 SPC 0052 7979 6/04/98 0.189 -12.0 29.1 
59-3 SPC 0052 7980 6/04/98 0.222 -9.7 26.6 
59-4 SPC 0052 7988 6/04/98 0.538 -8.9 25.8 
74-3 SPC 0052 7981 6/04/98 0.143 -13.6 30.1 
75-3 SPC 0052 7982 6/04/98 0.189 -11.8 29.0 0.416 
76-3 SPC 0052 7983 6/04/98 0.687 -5.5 25.2 0.214 
77-3 SPC 0052 7984 6/04/98 0.621 -5.5 21.1 
78-3 SPC 0052 7986 6/04/98 1.494 -8.7 23.4 0.210 
185-3 SPC 0052 7987 6/04/98 0.160 -14.7 22.0 
Observation Drift SPC 0052 7989 6/04/98 0.046 -10.6 36.4 
57-3 SPC 0052 7278 8/06/98 0.152 -15.4 29.5 
58-3 SPC 0052 7279 8/06/98 0.234 -9.3 28.3 
59-3 SPC 0052 7281 8/06/98 0.342 -7.7 25.4 
60-3 SPC 0052 7283 8/06/98 14.160 -0.5 24.2 
61-3 SPC 0052 7285 8/06/98 2.986 -3.7 23.9 
74-3 SPC 0052 7267 8/05/98 0.133 -12.1 29.9 
75-3 SPC 0052 7270 8/05/98 0.222 -10.4 29.4 
76-3 SPC 0052 7269 8/05/98 0.949 -3.5 24.5 
77-3 SPC 0052 7271 8/05/98 3.330 -4.3 24.0 
78-3 SPC 0052 7273 8/05/98 2.474 -7.2 23.4 0.156 
185-3 SPC 0052 7275 8/06/98 0.186 -12.7 28.8 
186-2 SPC 0052 7277 8/06/98 1.497 -8.4 25.8 
182 (56') SPC 0052 7276 8/06/98 0.092 -13.1 33.0 
182 (64') SPC 0052 7266 8/05/98 0.054 -11.9 32.4 
Observation Drift SPC 0052 7287 8/06/98 0.038 -9.8 38.0 
57-3 SPC 0052 7288 10/07/98 0.189 -16.0 29.2 0.492 
58-3 SPC 0052 7289 10/07/98 0.414 -7.5 28.0 
59-3 SPC 0052 7290 10/07/98 0.633 -5.1 22.7 0.200 
61-3 SPC 0052 7293 10/07/98 5.335 -2.1 22.6 0.125 
74-3 SPC 0052 7295 10/07/98 - - 
75-3 SPC 0052 7994 10/07/98 0.374 -10.3 27.6 0.322 
76-3 SPC 0052 7296 10/07/98 1.611 -3.1 21.3 0.140 
77-3 SPC 0052 7990 10/08/98 0.216 -5.1 25.1 
78-3 SPC 0052 7992 10/08/98 2.702 -3.9 22.1 0.105 
185-3 SPC 0052 7995 10/08/98 0.264 -10.5 - 0.369 
186-2 SPC 0052 7996 10/08/98 2.239 -7.5 24.0

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-53 September 2002 
Table 6.3.4.2-1. Concentration and Isotopic Compositions of CO2 in Gas Samples Collected during the 
DST Heating Phase (continued) 
Sample Interval1 
(BH-Zone) 
YMP Tracking 
Number 
Date 
Sampled 
2CO2 
(v/v-%)2 
.13C ()3 .18O ()4 14C (fraction 
modern 
carbon) 
Observation Drift SPC 0052 7998 10/08/98 0.046 -10.8 37.6 
Heated Drift SPC 0052 7999 10/08/98 0.044 -9.5 30.0 
57-1 SPC 0054 1258 12/16/98 0.068 -9.8 31.2 
57-2 SPC 0054 1259 12/16/98 0.191 -7.9 29.3 
57-3 SPC 0054 1260 12/16/98 0.220 -16.5 28.7 
57-4 SPC 0054 1261 12/16/98 0.130 -12.8 29.5 
58-3 SPC 0054 1262 12/16/98 0.392 -6.1 28.0 
59-1 SPC 0054 1263 12/16/98 0.087 -7.9 28.0 
59-3 SPC 0054 1264 12/16/98 0.501 -4.1 22.4 
59-4 SPC 0054 1267 12/16/98 1.562 -4.2 24.1 
60-2 SPC 0054 1269 12/16/98 0.099 -5.5 23.7 
61-1 SPC 0054 1271 12/16/98 0.051 -3.9 32.0 
61-2 SPC 0054 1272 12/16/98 0.083 -4.4 24.8 
61-4 SPC 0054 1274 12/16/98 0.331 - - 
74-1 SPC 0054 1236 12/14/98 0.047 -10.0 29.8 
74-2 SPC 0054 1235 12/14/98 0.084 - - 
74-3 SPC 0054 1234 12/14/98 0.220 -12.3 29.8 
74-4 SPC 0054 1233 12/14/98 - - 
75-3 SPC 0054 1232 12/14/98 0.495 -9.3 27.8 
76-1 SPC 0054 1231 12/14/98 0.058 -9.6 30.6 
76-2 SPC 0054 1237 12/15/98 0.308 -5.2 24.5 
76-3 SPC 0054 1239 12/15/98 1.430 -2.7 20.9 
76-4 SPC 0054 1241 12/15/98 2.164 -3.5 23.6 
77-3 SPC 0054 1243 12/15/98 0.115 - - 
78-1 SPC 0054 1245 12/15/98 0.100 -11.4 29.1 
78-2 SPC 0054 1246 12/15/98 2.188 -3.8 24.6 
78-3 SPC 0054 1248 12/15/98 2.370 -1.5 23.2 0.081 
78-4 SPC 0054 1250 12/15/98 0.358 -11.7 28.1 
185-1 SPC 0054 1252 12/15/98 0.159 -13.2 29.5 
185-2 SPC 0054 1253 12/15/98 1.387 -10.7 28.6 
185-3 SPC 0054 1254 12/15/98 0.293 -10.3 27.9 
185-4 SPC 0054 1255 12/15/98 0.136 -12.4 28.8 
186-2 SPC 0054 1256 12/15/98 2.043 -6.6 23.5 
Observation Drift SPC 0054 1266 12/16/98 0.038 -9.3 39.2 
Heated Drift SPC 0054 1276 12/16/98 0.040 -9.7 26.5 0.988 
57-3 SPC 0055 0611 3/02/99 0.277 -16.5 26.4 
58-3 SPC 0055 0612 3/02/99 0.552 -5.7 25.8 
59-3 SPC 0055 0613 3/02/99 0.746 -3.3 20.1 
60-2 SPC 0055 0616 3/02/99 0.087 -5.9 22.5 
61-2 SPC 0055 0618 3/02/99 0.097 -3.5 21.5 
74-1 SPC 0054 1278 3/01/99 0.046 - - 
74-2 SPC 0054 1279 3/01/99 0.110 -10.9 27.9 
74-3 SPC 0054 1280 3/01/99 0.437 -11.2 27.1 
74-4 SPC 0054 1281 3/01/99 0.302 -11.0 27.6 
75-3 SPC 0054 1282 3/01/99 1.051 -7.9 25.5 
76-1 SPC 0054 1283 3/01/99 0.055 -7.9 33.9 
76-2 SPC 0054 1285 3/01/99 0.324 -4.6 22.7

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-54 September 2002 
Table 6.3.4.2-1. Concentration and Isotopic Compositions of CO2 in Gas Samples Collected during the 
DST Heating Phase (continued) 
Sample Interval1 
(BH-Zone) 
YMP Tracking 
Number 
Date 
Sampled 
2CO2 
(v/v-%)2 
.13C ()3 .18O ()4 14C (fraction 
modern 
carbon) 
76-3 SPC 0054 1287 3/01/99 1.860 -3.0 19.9 
76-4 SPC 0055 0600 3/01/99 4.987 -3.0 20.1 
77-3 SPC 0055 0603 3/02/99 0.119 -6.3 20.5 
78-1 SPC 0054 1284 3/02/99 0.090 -9.0 28.4 
78-3 SPC 0055 0605 3/02/99 4.409 -1.8 18.8 
185-2 SPC 0055 0607 3/02/99 2.020 -9.5 26.1 0.197 
185-3 SPC 0055 0608 3/02/99 0.331 -9.8 25.7 0.314 
186-2 SPC 0055 0609 3/02/99 2.455 -5.8 20.1 
Observation Drift SPC 0055 0602 3/01/99 0.039 -7.8 33.9 
57-3 SPC 0055 1123 5/25/99 0.333 -15.0 30.7 0.467 
58-3 SPC 0055 1121 5/25/99 0.681 -3.5 30.2 
59-3 SPC 0055 1119 5/25/99 1.101 -1.0 23.5 
60-2 SPC 0055 1115 5/25/99 0.074 -6.9 26.4 
60-3 SPC 0055 1113 5/25/99 0.072 -9.3 31.5 
61-2 SPC 0055 1117 5/25/99 0.073 -4.7 27.3 
74-1 SPC 0055 1124 5/25/99 0.047 - - 
74-2 SPC 0055 1125 5/25/99 0.129 -10.2 29.1 
74-3 SPC 0055 1126 5/25/99 0.639 -9.9 28.7 0.277 
74-4 SPC 0055 1127 5/25/99 0.406 -9.6 29.5 
75-3 SPC 0055 1128 5/25/99 1.374 -6.3 27.9 0.178 
76-1 SPC 0055 1130 5/26/99 0.058 - - 
76-2 SPC 0055 1131 5/26/99 0.535 -2.2 24.8 
76-3 SPC 0055 1133 5/26/99 3.112 -2.0 20.0 0.139 
76-4 SPC 0055 1135 5/26/99 13.077 -1.3 22.7 
77-3 SPC 0055 1137 5/26/99 0.187 -0.2 28.9 
78-3 SPC 0055 1139 5/26/99 0.288 -0.1 23.1 0.243 
185-2 SPC 0055 1142 5/26/99 2.311 -3.5 36.9 
185-3 SPC 0055 1143 5/26/99 0.426 -8.6 27.1 
186-2 SPC 0055 1141 5/26/99 0.041 -9.5 37.5 
Observation Drift SPC 0055 1144 5/26/99 0.042 - - 
57-2 SPC 0055 1145 8/09/99 0.362 -4.7 26.7 
57-3 SPC 0055 1146 8/09/99 0.330 -15.1 27.7 
57-4 SPC 0055 1147 8/09/99 0.173 -6.4 35.2 
58-3 SPC 0055 1148 8/09/99 1.209 -4.3 25.5 
59-2 SPC 0055 1161 8/09/99 1.016 -0.3 19.6 
59-3 SPC 0055 1163 8/09/99 1.273 -1.0 18.6 0.120 
59-4 SPC 0055 1165 8/09/99 6.573 -2.5 22.4 
60-3 SPC 0055 1167 8/10/99 0.332 -5.5 22.5 
74-2 SPC 0055 1170 8/10/99 0.158 -10.2 27.6 
74-3 SPC 0055 1171 8/10/99 0649 -10.1 27.3 
74-4 SPC 0055 1172 8/10/99 0.328 -9.0 30.3 
75-3 SPC 0055 1173 8/10/99 1.315 -7.1 25.1 
76-3 SPC 0055 1175 8/10/99 2.658 -2.1 21.5 
77-3 SPC 0055 1177 8/10/99 0.152 - - 
78-3 SPC 0055 1179 8/10/99 0.123 -2.5 20.6 
185-2 SPC 0055 1182 8/10/99 3.214 -7.4 26.3 
185-3 SPC 0055 1183 8/10/99 0.496 -6.2 29.7

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-55 September 2002 
Table 6.3.4.2-1. Concentration and Isotopic Compositions of CO2 in Gas Samples Collected during the 
DST Heating Phase (continued) 
Sample Interval1 
(BH-Zone) 
YMP Tracking 
Number 
Date 
Sampled 
2CO2 
(v/v-%)2 
.13C ()3 .18O ()4 14C (fraction 
modern 
carbon) 
186-3 SPC 0055 1184 8/10/99 0.613 -8.2 23.5 
Observation Drift SPC 0055 1181 8/10/99 0.038 -8.2 38.3 
57-3 SPC 0055 1186 11/29/99 0.431 -11.5 31.4 0.427 
57-4 SPC 0055 1187 11/29/99 0.275 -7.3 32.1 
58-3 SPC 0055 1188 11/29/99 1.210 -3.0 26.3 
59-4 SPC 0055 1191 11/29/99 9.016 -1.6 14.8 
61-4 SPC 0055 1194 11/29/99 3.551 -3.8 19.9 
74-3 SPC 0055 1197 11/29/99 1.330 -8.6 26.0 
74-4 SPC 0055 1198 11/29/99 0.698 -8.7 26.4 
75-3 SPC 0055 1199 11/29/99 2.779 -5.5 23.1 0.129 
76-37 SPC 0055 7071 11/30/99 0.594 -3.0 19.6 0.182 
76-4 SPC 0055 7058 11/30/99 6.861 -0.1 14.7 
77-3 SPC 0055 7060 11/30/99 0.220 -4.3 22.6 
78-3 SPC 0055 7062 11/30/99 0.619 -0.3 24.1 
78-4 SPC 0055 7064 11/30/99 1.059 -4.6 25.7 
185-2 SPC 0055 7067 11/30/99 5.208 -6.3 25.7 0.133 
185-3 SPC 0055 7068 11/30/99 0.895 -6.8 24.4 0.190 
186-3 SPC 0055 7069 11/30/99 1.796 -7.4 22.6 0.206 
Heated Drift SPC 0055 1196 11/30/99 0.043 -9.9 20.1 
Observation Drift SPC 0055 7066 11/30/99 0.040 -8.8 37.5 
57-3 SPC 0055 9314 4/19/00 0.383 -8.8 29.2 
58-3 SPC 0055 9315 4/19/00 1.672 -4.1 22.0 
59-3 SPC 0055 9317 4/19/00 0.210 -2.5 24.0 
60-4 SPC 0055 9319 4/19/00 0.132 -9.7 37.0 
0.75 SPC 0055 9321 4/19/00 0.075 - - 
61-4 SPC 0055 9323 4/19/00 6.308 -3.3 21.8 
74-3 SPC 0055 9304 4/18/00 1.291 -8.1 23.3 
74-4 SPC 0055 9305 4/18/00 0.724 -7.3 25.7 
75-3 SPC 0055 9306 4/18/00 2.430 -3.6 21.8 
77-3 SPC 0055 9308 4/18/00 0.156 -6.7 21.0 
78-3 SPC 0055 9310 4/18/00 0.353 -0.5 21.6 0.185 
78-4 SPC 0055 9312 4/18/00 1.657 -4.5 22.5 
185-2 SPC 0055 9300 4/18/00 3.877 -5.8 23.7 
185-3 SPC 0055 9301 4/18/00 0.823 -5.6 22.7 
186-3 SPC 0055 9302 4/18/00 1.418 -3.1 35.2 
Heated Drift SPC 0055 9326 4/19/00 0.042 -10.7 13.7 
Observation Drift SPC 0055 9325 4/19/00 0.042 - - 
57-3/4 SPC 0055 9328 8/21/00 0.605 -8.4 15.3 0.201 
58-3 SPC 0055 9329 8/21/00 3.262 -3.0 12.1 
59-3 SPC 0055 9331 8/21/00 0.108 -4.0 17.4 
60-2/3/4 SPC 0055 9333 8/21/00 0.077 -8.3 18.7 
61-3/4 SPC 0055 9335 8/21/00 0.056 -8.0 16.6 
74-3 SPC 0055 9337 8/22/00 1.179 -7.1 13.4 0.154 
74-4 SPC 0055 9338 8/22/00 0.978 -5.8 14.7 
75-3 SPC 0055 9339 8/22/00 1.573 -2.2 10.7 
76-3 SPC 0055 9341 8/22/00 0.082 -5.2 16.4

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-56 September 2002 
Table 6.3.4.2-1. Concentration and Isotopic Compositions of CO2 in Gas Samples Collected during the 
DST Heating Phase (continued) 
Sample Interval1 
(BH-Zone) 
YMP Tracking 
Number 
Date 
Sampled 
2CO2 
(v/v-%)2 
.13C ()3 .18O ()4 14C (fraction 
modern 
carbon) 
77-2/3 SPC 0055 9343 8/22/00 0.095 -7.0 13.7 
78-2/3 SPC 0055 9346 8/22/00 0.355 -2.4 10.9 
185-2 SPC 0055 9348 8/22/00 5.115 -5.2 14.1 
185-3 SPC 0055 9350 8/22/00 1.405 -4.5 13.0 
186-3 SPC 0055 9352 8/22/00 4.408 -3.0 11.0 
Heated Drift SPC 0055 9354 8/22/00 0.046 - - 
Observation Drift SPC 0055 9345 8/22/00 0.040 -9.7 27.2 
57-3/4 SPC 0055 9395 1/22/01 0.67 -7.6 25.8 0.170 
58-3 SPC 0055 9397 1/22/01 2.84 -3.4 20.5 
59-3 SPC 0055 9399 1/22/01 0.11 -5.0 27.4 
60-3/2/4 SPC 0055 9401 1/22/01 0.11 -10.4 24.0 
61-3/2 SPC 0055 9403 1/22/01 0.54 -7.2 26.4 
74-3 SPC 0055 9406 1/23/01 1.14 -6.3 23.4 0.144 
75-3 SPC 0055 9408 1/23/01 1.65 2.7 32.9 0.166 
76-3/2 SPC 0055 9410 1/23/01 0.19 -1.6 - 0.296 
77-3/2 SPC 0055 9412 1/23/01 0.09 -7.9 22.2 
78-3/2/4 SPC 0055 9414 1/23/01 0.68 1.3 35.3 
185-2 SPC 0055 9416 1/23/01 6.68 -4.8 24.6 
185-3 SPC 0055 9418 1/23/01 1.94 -4.3 23.2 
186-3 SPC 0055 9420 1/23/01 7.76 -3.1 20.8 
Observation Drift 
1 
SPC 0055 9394 1/22/01 0.04 -10.4 37.6 
Observation Drift 
2 
SPC 0055 9422 1/23/01 0.04 -9.8 37.7 
57-3/4 SPC 0055 9357 4/17/01 0.784 -6.5 26.1 
58-3 SPC 0055 9359 4/17/01 3.467 -3.7 19.9 
59-3 SPC 0055 9361 4/17/01 0.108 -3.2 27.8 
60-3/2/4/1 SPC 0055 9363 4/17/01 0.080 -10.7 26.3 
61-3/2/4 SPC 0055 9365 4/17/01 0.068 -6.8 24.7 
74-3 SPC 0055 9367 4/18/01 1.139 -5.6 22.8 
75-3 SPC 0055 9369 4/18/01 0.941 -0.1 24.8 
76-3/2 SPC 0055 9371 4/18/01 0.178 -2.7 20.9 
77-3/2 SPC 0055 9373 4/18/01 0.102 -8.2 23.1 
78-3/2/4/1 SPC 0055 9375 4/18/01 0.795 -4.9 20.9 0.187 
185-2 SPC 0055 9378 4/18/01 7.855 -3.9 25.9 
185-3 SPC 0055 9380 4/18/01 2.284 -4.6 21.6 
186-3 SPC 0055 9382 4/18/01 6.413 -2.8 18.7 
Heated Drift SPC 0055 9384 4/18/01 0.046 - - 
Observation Drift SPC 0055 9377 4/18/01 0.038 -9.1 38.1

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-57 September 2002 
Table 6.3.4.2-1. Concentration and Isotopic Compositions of CO2 in Gas Samples Collected during the 
DST Heating Phase (continued) 
Sample Interval1 
(BH-Zone) 
YMP Tracking 
Number 
Date 
Sampled 
2CO2 
(v/v-%)2 
.13C ()3 .18O ()4 14C (fraction 
modern 
carbon) 
57-3/4 SPC 0055 9385 8/07/01 1.011 - - 0.240 
58-3 SPC 0055 9387 8/07/01 6.342 -3.1 20.0 
59-3/4 SPC 0055 9389 8/08/01 0.178 - - 
60-3/2/4/1 SPC 0055 9391 8/07/01 0.096 -10.3 27.6 
61-3/2/4 SPC 0055 9393 8/07/01 0.557 -5.8 25.6 
74-3 SPC 0055 9431 8/08/01 0.643 -1.1 35.1 0.326 
75-3 SPC 0055 9433 8/08/01 0.821 -3.1 23.7 0.233 
76-3/2 SPC 0055 9435 8/08/01 0.130 -4.5 21.4 0.456 
77-3 SPC 0055 9437 8/08/01 0.090 -4.1 31.9 
78-3/2/4 SPC 0055 9439 8/08/01 1.966 1.2 29.3 0.192 
185-2 SPC 0055 9424 8/07/01 11.522 -4.1 23.1 0.080 
185-3 SPC 0055 9426 8/07/01 4.427 -4.7 21.9 0.080 
186-3 SPC 0055 9428 8/07/01 8.039 -1.2 21.7 
Heated Drift SPC 0055 9356 8/07/01 0.039 -10.0 17.7 0.982 
Observation Drift SPC 0055 9430 8/07/01 0.034 -8.9 38.8 
57-3/4 SPC 0101 6517 11/27/01 0.88 -7.0 22.8 
58-3 SPC 0101 6519 11/27/01 2.50 - - 
59-3/4 SPC 0101 6522 11/28/01 0.08 -3.4 33.2 
61-3/2/4 SPC 0101 6524 11/28/01 0.27 -3.6 24.0 
74-3 SPC 0101 6501 11/27/01 0.64 - - 
75-3 SPC 0101 6504 11/27/01 0.85 - - 
76-1 SPC 0101 6511 11/27/01 0.37 -4.9 24.1 
76-3/2 SPC 0101 6509 11/27/01 0.92 -0.1 18.9 
76-4 SPC 0101 6507 11/27/01 0.07 -6.5 32.3 
77-3 SPC 0101 6513 11/27/01 0.06 - - 
78-3/2/4 SPC 0101 6515 11/27/01 0.71 -8.5 35.5 
185-1 SPC 0055 9448 11/26/01 0.69 -4.4 26.4 
185-2 SPC 0055 9445 11/26/01 4.83 -4.5 23.5 
185-3 SPC 0055 9443 11/26/01 2.90 - - 
185-4 SPC 0055 9450 11/26/01 1.49 -6.6 24.0 
186-3 SPC 0101 6526 11/28/01 7.70 - - 
Heated Drift SPC 0101 6528 11/26/01 0.06 -9.8 36.4 
Observation Drift SPC 0055 9452 11/26/01 0.07 -6.9 33.4

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-58 September 2002 
Table 6.3.4.2-1. Concentration and Isotopic Compositions of CO2 in Gas Samples Collected during the 
DST Heating Phase (continued) 
Sample Interval1 
(BH-Zone) 
YMP Tracking 
Number 
Date 
Sampled 
2CO2 
(v/v-%)2 
.13C ()3 .18O ()4 14C (fraction 
modern 
carbon) 
57-3/4 SPC 0101 6546 1/08/02 0.90 -5.5 26.6 
59-3/4 SPC 0101 6400 1/08/02 0.15 - - 
61-3/2/4 SPC 0101 6402 1/08/02 0.63 3.1 43.8 
74-3 SPC 0101 6538 1/07/02 1.08 -4.6 24.2 
75-3 SPC 0101 6540 1/07/02 6.65 -1.5 19.4 
76-3/2 SPC 0101 6542 1/07/02 0.77 -0.7 17.9 
78-3/2/4 SPC 0101 6544 1/07/02 0.79 -4.8 19.7 
185-2 SPC 0101 6532 1/07/02 7.50 -4.5 23.5 
185-3 SPC 0101 6534 1/07/02 3.43 -4.4 22.5 
186-3 SPC 0101 6536 1/07/02 3.45 - - 
Heated Drift SPC 0101 6531 1/07/02 0.05 -9.2 25.9 
Observation Drift SPC 0101 6530 1/07/02 0.06 -10.1 37.3 
1 Sample interval indicates the DST borehole followed by the interval within the borehole from which the sample was collected. 
Where more than one interval is noted, that means the sample was taken from the first interval given, but the packers between 
that interval and the others listed were deflated (e.g., 57-3/4 indicates the sample was taken from DST borehole 57, interval 3, 
but the packer between intervals 3 and 4 was deflated). Heater Drift samples were taken from Heater Drift gas sampling port 
#2 (by the bulkhead) and AO Drift samples were air samples taken from the Access Observation. 
2 CO2 concentrations reported for samples collected during February of 1997 through August of 2000 and from April of 2001 
through August of 2001 were measured using the Li-Cor in the Amundson laboratory on the UC Berkeley campus. Data 
reported for samples collected during January of 2001 and November of 2001 through January of 2002 were measured on the 
Columbus Instruments Gas Analyzer at the ESF. 
3 Stable carbon isotope ratios are given as part per thousand or per mil () variations in the ratio of 13C to 12C relative to carbon 
isotope ratio of VPDB (Vienna PeeDee Belemnite), an internationally accepted standard for reporting carbon isotope data. 
4 Stable oxygen isotope ratios are given as part per thousand or per mil () variations in the ratio of 18O to 16O relative to oxygen 
isotope ratio of VSMOW (Vienna Standard Mean Ocean Water), an internationally accepted standard for reporting oxygen 
isotope data. 
5 Samples collected in 150-cc metal canisters (as opposed to Tedlar bags).

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-59 September 2002 
Table 6.3.4.2-2. CO2 Concentrations in DST Gas Samples Collected during January, 2001 
Borehole interval Tracking Number 
UC Berkeley 
Amundson Lab 
Li-Cor 
(%-volume) 
Columbus 
Instruments Field 
Gas Analyzer 
(%-volume) 
57-3/4 SPC 00559395 0.66 0.67 
58-3 SPC 00559397 2.53 2.84 
59-3 SPC 00559399 0.10 0.11 
60-3/2/4 SPC 00559401 0.11 0.11 
61-3/2 SPC 00559403 0.06 0.05 
74-3 SPC 00559406 1.01 1.14 
75-3 SPC 00559408 0.97 1.65 
76-3/2 SPC 00559410 0.18 0.19 
77-3/2 SPC 00559412 0.09 0.09 
78-3/2/4 SPC 00559414 0.46 0.68 
185-2 SPC 00559416 5.75 6.81 
185-3 SPC 00559418 1.63 1.94 
186-3 SPC 00559420 6.61 7.76 
Observation Drift Air#1 SPC 00559394 0.04 0.04 
Observation Drift Air#2 SPC 00559422 0.04 0.04

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-60 September 2002 
Table 6.3.4.2-3. Hydrogen (.D) and Oxygen (.18O) Isotope Compositions of Steam Condensed from 
Gas Samples Collected During the DST Heating Phase 
Isotope Composition 
Sample Interval1 YMP Tracking # Date Sampled Hydrogen 
.D () 
2 Oxygen 
.18O () 
77-3 SPC 0052 7985 6/04/98 -95 -13.2 
58-3 SPC 0052 7280 8/06/98 -128 -18.1 
59-3 SPC 0052 7282 8/06/98 -132 -18.6 
60-3 SPC 0052 7284 8/06/98 -110 -16.1 
61-3 SPC 0052 7286 8/06/98 -152 -21.0 
76-3 SPC 0052 7270 8/05/98 -122 -17.5 
77-3 SPC 0052 7272 8/05/98 -103 -14.1 
78-3 SPC 0052 7274 8/05/98 -127 -18.6 
59-3 SPC 0052 7291 10/07/98 -126 -18.3 
76-3 SPC 0052 7299 10/07/98 -126 -18.1 
77-3 SPC 0052 7991 10/08/98 -86 -10.6 
78-3 SPC 0052 7993 10/08/98 -18.1 
186-2 SPC 0052 7997 10/08/98 -126 -17.9 
59-3 SPC 0054 1265 12/16/98 -122 -18.0 
59-4 SPC 0054 1268 12/16/98 -119 -16.9 
60-2 SPC 0054 1270 12/16/98 -90 -12.2 
61-2 SPC 0054 1273 12/16/98 -106 -16.1 
61-4 SPC 0054 1275 12/16/98 -119 -16.9 
76-2 SPC 0054 1238 12/15/98 -131 -17.6 
76-3 SPC 0054 1240 12/15/98 -127 -18.5 
76-4 SPC 0054 1242 12/15/98 -110 -16.6 
77-3 SPC 0054 1244 12/15/98 -83 -10.1 
78-2 SPC 0054 1247 12/15/98 -110 -16.8 
78-3 SPC 0054 1249 12/15/98 -132 -18.5 
78-4 SPC 0054 1251 12/15/98 -116 -17.2 
186-2 SPC 0054 1257 12/15/98 -140 -20.3 
Heated Drift 2 SPC 0054 1277 12/16/98 -64 -7.5 
59-3 SPC 0055 0614 3/02/99 -118 -17.2 
60-2 SPC 0055 0617 3/02/99 -87 -10.9 
60-3 SPC 0055 0615 3/02/99 -101 -13.8 
61-2 SPC 0055 0619 3/02/99 -95 -14.4 
76-2 SPC 0054 1286 3/01/99 -138 -19.0 
76-3 SPC 0054 1288 3/01/99 -126 -18.2 
76-4 SPC 0055 0601 3/01/99 -110 -16.1 
77-3 SPC 0055 0604 3/02/99 -82 -8.2 
78-3 SPC 0055 0606 3/02/99 -122 -17.7 
186-2 SPC 0055 0610 3/02/99 -130 -19.4 
60-2 SPC 0055 1116 5/25/99 -85 -11.2 
60-3 SPC 0055 1114 5/25/99 -86 -19.4 
61-2 SPC 0055 1118 5/25/99 -91 -11.1 
59-3 SPC 0055 1120 5/25/99 -104 -11.0 
58-3 SPC 0055 1122 5/25/99 -124 -12.2 
75-3 SPC 0055 1129 5/25/99 -128 -17.4 
76-2 SPC 0055 1132 5/26/99 -140 -17.1

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-61 September 2002 
Table 6.3.4.2-3. Hydrogen (.D) and Oxygen (.18O) Isotope Compositions of Steam Condensed from Gas 
Samples Collected During the DST Heating Phase (continued) 
Isotope Composition 
Sample Interval1 YMP Tracking # Date Sampled Hydrogen 
.D () 
2 Oxygen 
.18O () 
76-3 SPC 0055 1134 5/26/99 -111 -12.5 
76-4 SPC 0055 1136 5/26/99 -110 -11.0 
77-3 SPC 0055 1138 5/26/99 -83 -12.8 
78-3 SPC 0055 1140 5/26/99 -117 -18.4 
58-3 SPC 0055 1149 8/09/99 -126 -17.6 
59-2 SPC 0055 1162 8/09/99 -112 -17.1 
59-3 SPC 0055 1164 8/09/99 -109 -15.9 
59-4 SPC 0055 1166 8/09/99 -107 -16.1 
60-3 SPC 0055 1168 8/10/99 -86 -12.1 
75-3 SPC 0055 1174 8/10/99 -119 -16.8 
76-3 SPC 0055 1176 8/10/99 -122 -17.7 
77-3 SPC 0055 1178 8/10/99 -89 -11.2 
78-3 SPC 0055 1180 8/10/99 -114 -17.1 
186-3 SPC 0055 1185 8/10/99 -94 -13.8 
58-3 SPC 0055 1189 11/29/99 -122 -17.4 
59-3 SPC 0055 1190 11/29/99 -103 -14.3 
59-4 SPC 0055 1192 11/29/99 -125 -18.9 
61-3 SPC 0055 1193 11/29/99 -101 -14.2 
61-4 SPC 0055 1195 11/29/99 -113 -16.3 
75-3 SPC 0055 7056 11/29/99 -121 -17.5 
76-3 SPC 0055 7072 11/30/99 -107 -16.3 
76-4 SPC 0055 7059 11/30/99 -12.6 
77-3 SPC 0055 7061 11/30/99 -81 -9.9 
78-3 SPC 0055 7063 11/30/99 -104 -13.7 
78-4 SPC 0055 7065 11/30/99 -107 -15.8 
186-3 SPC 0055 7070 11/30/99 -93 -13.2 
58-3 SPC 0055 9316 4/19/00 -117 -17.3 
59-3 SPC 0055 9318 4/19/00 -89 -12.0 
60-4 SPC 0055 9320 4/19/00 -87 -11.8 
61-3 SPC 0055 9322 4/19/00 -101 -14.3 
61-4 SPC 0055 9324 4/19/00 -121 -18.3 
75-3 SPC 0055 9307 4/18/00 -117 -16.5 
77-3 SPC 0055 9309 4/18/00 -83 -11.0 
78-3 SPC 0055 9311 4/18/00 -92 -11.6 
78-4 SPC 0055 9313 4/18/00 -101 -16.5 
186-3 SPC 0055 9303 4/18/00 -90 -13.7 
58-3 SPC 0055 9330 8/21/00 -17.2 
59-3 SPC 0055 9332 8/21/00 -90 -10.9 
60-3/2/4 SPC 0055 9334 8/21/00 -89 -12.0 
61-3/4 SPC 0055 9336 8/21/00 -89 -12.0 
75-3 SPC 0055 9340 8/22/00 -118 -17.1 
76-3 SPC 0055 9342 8/22/00 -101 -13.4 
77-3/2 SPC 0055 9344 8/22/00 -85 -10.7 
78-3/2 SPC 0055 9347 8/22/00 -95 -13.0

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-62 September 2002 
Table 6.3.4.2-3. Hydrogen (.D) and Oxygen (.18O) Isotope Compositions of Steam Condensed from Gas 
Samples Collected During the DST Heating Phase (continued) 
Isotope Composition 
Sample Interval1 YMP Tracking # Date Sampled Hydrogen 
.D () 
2 Oxygen 
.18O () 
185-2 SPC 0055 9349 8/22/00 -139 -17.3 
185-3 SPC 0055 9351 8/22/00 -132 -18.1 
186-3 SPC 0055 9353 8/22/00 -123 -15.0 
57-3/4 SPC 0055 9396 1/22/01 -128 -17.9 
58-3 SPC 0055 9398 1/22/01 -126 -19.4 
59-3 SPC 0055 9400 1/22/01 -86 -11.2 
60-3/2/4 SPC 0055 9402 1/22/01 -81 -11.1 
61-3/2 SPC 0055 9404 1/22/01 -88 -11.0 
74-3 SPC 0055 9407 1/23/01 -122 -17.4 
75-3 SPC 0055 9409 1/23/01 -121 -17.1 
76-3/2 SPC 0055 9411 1/23/01 -90 -12.5 
77-3/2 SPC 0055 9413 1/23/01 -90 -11.0 
78-3/2/4 SPC 0055 9415 1/23/01 -95 -12.8 
185-2 SPC 0055 9417 1/23/01 -139 -18.4 
185-3 SPC 0055 9419 1/23/01 -132 -18.1 
186-3 SPC 0055 9421 1/23/01 -135 -19.1 
57-3/4 SPC 0055 9358 4/17/01 -123 -18.0 
58-3 SPC 0055 9360 4/17/01 -129 -19.6 
59-3 SPC 0055 9362 4/17/01 -85 -11.1 
60-3/2/4/1 SPC 0055 9364 4/17/01 -81 -10.1 
61-3/2/4 SPC 0055 9366 4/17/01 -86 -11.3 
74-3 SPC 0055 9368 4/18/01 -123 -17.7 
75-3 SPC 0055 9370 4/18/01 -112 -16.8 
76-3/2 SPC 0055 9372 4/18/01 -92 -13.0 
77-3/2 SPC 0055 9374 4/18/01 -91 -11.7 
78-3/2/4/1 SPC 0055 9376 4/18/01 -91 -12.9 
185-2 SPC 0055 9379 4/18/01 -137 -18.2 
185-3 SPC 0055 9381 4/18/01 -133 -18.5 
186-3 SPC 0055 9383 4/18/01 -111 -16.2 
57-3/4 SPC 0055 9386 8/07/01 -121 -17.7 
58-3 SPC 0055 9388 8/07/01 -129 -20.1 
59-3/4 SPC 0055 9390 8/08/01 -87 -11.3 
60-3/2/4/1 SPC 0055 9392 8/07/01 -74 -8.8 
61-3/2/4 SPC 0055 9355 8/07/01 -59 -10.7 
74-3 SPC 0055 9432 8/08/01 -126 -17.8 
75-3 SPC 0055 9434 8/08/01 -115 -16.9 
76-3/2 SPC 0055 9436 8/08/01 -100 -13.2 
77-3 SPC 0055 9438 8/08/01 -89 -11.6 
78-3/2/4 SPC 0055 9440 8/08/01 -84 -10.1 
185-2 SPC 0055 9425 8/07/01 -18.6 
185-3 SPC 0055 9427 8/07/01 -117 -18.4 
186-3 SPC 0055 9429 8/07/01 -112 -16.2

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-63 September 2002 
Table 6.3.4.2-3. Hydrogen (.D) and Oxygen (.18O) Isotope Compositions of Steam Condensed from Gas 
Samples Collected During the DST Heating Phase (continued) 
Isotope Composition 
Sample Interval1 YMP Tracking # Date Sampled Hydrogen 
.D () 
2 Oxygen 
.18O () 
57-3/4 SPC 0101 6518 11/27/01 -116 -16.9 
58-3 SPC 0101 6520 11/27/01 -124 -18.3 
59-3/4 SPC 0101 6523 11/28/01 -78 -10.2 
61-3/2/4 SPC 0101 6525 11/28/01 -60 -11.5 
74-3 SPC 0101 6502 11/27/01 -130 -18.1 
75-3 SPC 0101 6505 11/27/01 -114 -16.1 
76-1 SPC 0101 6512 11/27/01 -134 -18.2 
76-3/2 SPC 0101 6510 11/27/01 -143 -12.6 
76-4 SPC 0101 6508 11/27/01 -79 -11.3 
77-3 SPC 0101 6514 11/27/01 -95 -12.3 
78-3/2/4 SPC 0101 6516 11/27/01 -88 -11.5 
185-1 SPC 0055 9449 11/26/01 -133 -17.4 
185-2 SPC 0055 9446 11/26/01 -138 -18.3 
185-3 SPC 0055 9444 11/26/01 -122 -18.4 
185-4 SPC 0055 9451 11/26/01 -149 -17.7 
186-3 SPC 0101 6500 11/26/01 -100 -14.2 
186-3(II) SPC 0101 6527 11/28/01 -113 -16.2 
57-3/4 SPC 0101 6547 1/08/02 -81 -17.7 
58-3 SPC 0101 6549 1/08/02 -84 -18.5 
59-3/4 SPC 0101 6401 1/08/02 -79 -10.5 
61-3/2/4 SPC 0101 6403 1/08/02 -85 -11.2 
74-3 SPC 0101 6539 1/07/02 -117 -17.1 
75-3 SPC 0101 6541 1/07/02 -114 -17.0 
76-3/2 SPC 0101 6543 1/07/02 -88 -11.9 
78-3/2/4 SPC 0101 6545 1/07/02 -82 -10.7 
185-2 SPC 0101 6533 1/07/02 -131 -17.3 
185-3 SPC 0101 6535 1/07/02 -132 -18.5 
186-3 SPC 0101 6537 1/07/02 -109 -15.4 
1 Field # corresponds to intervals in hydrology boreholes 
2 Stable oxygen isotope ratios are given as part per thousand or per mil () variations in the ratio of 18O to 16O 
relative to oxygen isotope ratio of VSMOW (Vienna Standard Mean Ocean Water), an internationally 
accepted standard for reporting oxygen isotope data 
Table 6.3.4.3-1. Mineral Coverage on Fractures, Drill Core ESF-HD-TEMP-2 
Section 1, 25.0-29.3 ft, Non-Vapor-Phase Interval 
Stellerite Manganese Minerals Crystalline Silica/Feldspar Clay Calcite 
42.3% 1.5% 1.0% 4.3% 0% 
Section 2, 62.15-66.45 ft, Vapor-Phase Interval 
Stellerite Manganese Minerals Crystalline Silica/Feldspar Clay Calcite 
41.6% 2.0% 3.5% 4.7% 2.2%

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 T6.3-64 September 2002 
Table 6.3.4.5-1. Field Measurements and Fluoride Content of Condensates from HF Field Tests 
Sample Identification SMF Number Collection 
Date 
Field 
pH 
E.C. / TDS 
(S/cm) / (ppm) 
F 
(mg/L) 
BH 72 (pre-test)* SPC00559475 6/28/2001 4.8 15 / 9 nd < 0.007 
BH 72 (pre-test)* SPC00575228 11/8/2001 5.1  5.5 19 / 12 0.15 
BH 72 baseline* SPC00575219 11/26/2001 5.3 14 / 9 nd < 0.007 
Fluoroelastomer (FKM) and Teflon installed 11/26/2001 
BH 72 (FKM, PTFE) SPC00559478 11/29/2001 3.8 41 / 25 2.39 
BH 72 (FKM, PTFE) SPC01016065 12/5/2001 3.4  3.5 139 / 88 7.60 
BH 72 (FKM, PTFE) SPC01016066 12/5/2001 3.44 135 / 85 7.23 
Fluoroelastomer (FKM) and Teflon removed 1/9/2002 
BH 55 (pre-test)* SPC00575231 11/15/2002 7.5 279/176 0.52 
BH 55 (pre-test)* SPC00559483 11/21/2002 NA NA 8.56 *** 
BH 55 baseline** SPC00575229 11/26/2001 5.0 21 / 13 1.34 
BH 55** SPC00559479 11/29/2001 5.2 NA 0.35 
BH 55** SPC01016067 12/5/2001 NA NA 0.08 
* sample acquired with Tygon tubing 
** sample acquired using C276 alloy tubing 
*** sample likely contaminated, refer to Section 6.3.4.5.5

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 7-1 September 2002 
7. SUMMARY 
As mentioned in Section 1, the purpose of this Scientific Analysis Report is to document, in one 
report, the comprehensive set of measurements taken within the Yucca Mountain Site 
Characterization Project (YMP) Thermal Testing Program since its inception in 1996. This 
documentation is intended to make data collected readily usable to end users. Only brief 
discussions are provided for different data sets. These are intended to impart a clear sense of 
applicability of data, so that they will be used properly within the context of measurement 
uncertainty. This approach also keeps this report to a manageable size, an important constraint 
since massive amounts of measurements for three long-term thermal tests are addressed. 
Furthermore, thermal testing data currently residing in the TDMS have been reorganized and 
reformatted, as applicable, from often cumbersome Input-DTNs into a new set of more userfriendly 
Output-DTNs. 
Based on the above discussion, which indicates this report focuses only on measurements, and 
guidance provided in Attachment 3 of AP-SIII.9Q, the following discussion is a summary rather 
than a conclusion of a scientific analysis. The scientific analysis, which is broadly defined in 
Section 3.13 of AP-SIII.9Q, as applied in this report mostly involves the definition and 
investigation of thermal-hydrological-mechanical-chemical measurements, including laboratory 
and field characterization of the respective test blocks, from three thermal tests (LBT, SHT, and 
DST). This scientific analysis contrasts typical scientific analysis in other reports which tend to 
focus on numerical analyses and subsequent interpretations of findings that lead to a set of 
conclusions. 
The summary of this work, which addresses massive amounts of diverse measurements collected 
in the YMP Thermal Testing Program over the past six years, can be grouped into the following 
two categories: 
. The preparation of a single, comprehensive document that provides ready access to key 
material related to the myriad of thermal testing measurements from each of the three 
thermal tests. 
. The development of user-friendly Output-DTNs that will facilitate the usage of thermal 
testing data. 
Discussion of key material regarding thermal testing measurements associated with the YMP 
Thermal Testing Program is presented in Section 6. This discussion is organized by the four 
processes (thermal, hydrological, mechanical, and chemical) for each of the three thermal tests 
(LBT, SHT, and DST). Documentation includes an introduction and description, a cross section 
of behavior for each type of measurement (laboratory and field) for the two main testing phases 
(characterization and testing), a listing of Input-DTNs that contain the measurements, discussion 
of corresponding measurement uncertainties, and a set of germane references that provide much 
additional detail regarding the measurements. In addition, summaries of three in-depth 
investigations are provided: (1) heat and mass loss through the DST bulkhead, (2) scaling along 
the roof of the DST Heated Drift, and (3) investigation of DST water samples with high fluoride 
concentrations. Output-DTNs have also been restructured, as needed, to be more functional and

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 7-2 September 2002 
user-friendly than corresponding Input-DTNs. These Output-DTNs for the LBT, SHT, and DST 
are listed in Tables 6.1-1, 6.2-1, and 6.3-1, respectively. The improved structure of the Output- 
DTNs facilitates the review, understanding, and usage of the thermal testing measurements by 
providing improved data layout including: consolidation of incremental test data into a single set, 
graphical descriptions, and coordinates of boreholes and sensors. 
Any uncertainties related to measurements are described in the previous sections and no 
restrictions within the described parameters are necessary for subsequent use.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 8-1 September 2002 
8. INPUTS AND REFERENCES 
The following is a list of the references cited in this document. Column 1 represents the unique 
six digit numerical identifier, which is placed in the text following the reference callout (e.g., 
BSC 2002 [159051]). The purpose of these numbers is to assist the reader in locating a specific 
reference. Within the reference list, multiple sources by the same author (e.g., BAC 2002) are 
sorted alphabetically by title. 
8.1 CITED DOCUMENTS 
101786 ASTM D 4971-89. 1989. Standard Test Method for Determining the In Situ 
Modulus of Deformation of Rock Using the Diametrically Loaded 76-mm (3-in.) 
Borehole Jack. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: American Society for Testing and 
Materials. TIC: 245311. 
101541 Barton, N.; Lien, R.; and Lunde, J. 1974. Engineering Classification of Rock 
Masses for the Design of Tunnel Support. Rock Mechanics, 6, (4), 189-236. New 
York, New York: Springer-Verlag. TIC: 219995. 
101567 Bieniawski, Z.T. 1974. Geomechanics Classification of Rock Masses and its 
Application in Tunneling. Proceedings of the Third International Congress on Rock 
Mechanics. Volume II, part A. 27-32. Washington, D.C.: National Academy of 
Sciences. TIC: 217640. 
100653 Brodsky, N.S.; Riggins, M.; Connolly, J.; and Ricci, P. 1997. Thermal Expansion, 
Thermal Conductivity, and Heat Capacity Measurements for Boreholes UE25 NRG- 
4, UE25 NRG-5, USW NRG-6, and USW NRG-7/7A. SAND95-1955. Albuquerque, 
New Mexico: Sandia National Laboratories. ACC: MOL.19980311.0316. 
102003 Brown, E.T., ed. 1981. Rock Characterization Testing & Monitoring, ISRM 
Suggested Methods. New York, New York: Pergamon Press. TIC: 209865. 
159051 BSC (Bechtel SAIC Company) 2002. Technical Work Plan for: Unsaturated Zone 
Sections of License Application Chapters 8 and 12. TWP-NBS-HS-000003 REV 01. 
Las Vegas, Nevada: Bechtel SAIC Company. ACC: MOL.20020613.0192. 
158190 BSC (Bechtel SAIC Company) 2002. Test Plan for: Drift Scale Test. SITP-02-UZ- 
012 REV 00. Las Vegas, Nevada: Bechtel SAIC Company. ACC: 
MOL.20020204.0143. 
101433 Buesch, D.C. and Spengler, R.W. 1998. Character of the Middle Nonlithophysal 
Zone of the Topopah Spring Tuff at Yucca Mountain. High-Level Radioactive 
Waste Management, Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference, Las Vegas, 
Nevada, May 11-14, 1998. Pages 16-23. La Grange Park, Illinois: American 
Nuclear Society. TIC: 237082.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 8-2 September 2002 
100657 Buscheck, T.A. and Nitao, J.J. 1995. Thermal-Hydrological Analysis of Large-Scale 
Thermal Tests in the Exploratory Studies Facility at Yucca Mountain. UCRL-ID- 
121791. Livermore, California: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. ACC: 
MOL.19960501.0392. 
159473 Cho, J. 2001. ESF TCO Field Notebook #2 - Borehole Water Collection at ALCOVE 
5. Scientific Notebook SN-LANL-SCI-183-V1. ACC: MOL.20010531.0102. 
101588 Compton, R.R. 1962. Manual of Field Geology. New York, New York: John Wiley 
and Sons. TIC: 209518. 
101428 CRWMS M&O (Civilian Radioactive Waste Management System Management and 
Operating Contractor) 1996. Characterization of the ESF Thermal Test Area. 
B00000000-01717-5705-00047 REV 01. Las Vegas, Nevada: CRWMS M&O. 
ACC: MOL.19970116.0187. 
101375 CRWMS M&O 1996. Test Design, Plans and Layout Report for the ESF Thermal 
Test. BAB000000-01717-4600-00025 REV 01. Las Vegas, Nevada: CRWMS 
M&O. ACC: MOL.19970114.0166. 
101539 CRWMS M&O 1997. Ambient Characterization of the Drift Scale Test Block. 
BADD00000-01717-5705-00001 REV 01. Las Vegas, Nevada: CRWMS M&O. 
ACC: MOL.19980416.0689. 
146917 CRWMS M&O 1997. Drift Scale Test Design and Forecast Results. BAB000000- 
01717-4600-00007 REV 01. Las Vegas, Nevada: CRWMS M&O. ACC: 
MOL.19980710.0155. 
101540 CRWMS M&O 1997. Single Heater Test Status Report. BAB000000-01717-5700- 
00002 REV 01. Las Vegas, Nevada: CRWMS M&O. ACC: MOL.19980416.0696. 
111106 CRWMS M&O 1997. Updated In Situ Thermal Testing Program Strategy. 
B00000000-01717-5705-00065 REV 01. Las Vegas, Nevada: CRWMS M&O. 
ACC: MOL.19990526.0296. 
111115 CRWMS M&O 1998. Drift Scale Test As-Built Report. BAB000000-01717-5700- 
00003 REV 01. Las Vegas, Nevada: CRWMS M&O. ACC: MOL.19990107.0223. 
108306 CRWMS M&O 1998. Drift Scale Test Progress Report No. 1. BAB000000-01717- 
5700-00004 REV 01. Las Vegas, Nevada: CRWMS M&O. ACC: 
MOL.19990209.0240. 
159512 CRWMS M&O 1998. Thermal Test Progress Report #1. Las Vegas, Nevada: 
CRWMS M&O. ACC: MOL.19991104.0269.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 8-3 September 2002 
129261 CRWMS M&O 1999. Single Heater Test Final Report. BAB000000-01717-5700- 
00005 REV 00 ICN 1. Las Vegas, Nevada: CRWMS M&O. ACC: 
MOL.20000103.0634. 
159513 CRWMS M&O 1999. Thermal Test Progress Report #3. Las Vegas, Nevada: 
CRWMS M&O. ACC: MOL.19991104.0271. 
154585 CRWMS M&O 1999. Thermal Test Progress Report #2. BABEAF000-01717-5700- 
00001 REV 00. Las Vegas, Nevada: CRWMS M&O. ACC: MOL.19991104.0270. 
159126 Daily, W. and Owen, E. 1991. Cross-Borehole Resistivity Tomography. 
Geophysics, 56, (8), 1228-1235. Tulsa, Oklahoma: Society of Exploration 
Geophysicists. TIC: 253164. 
134360 Danko, G. and Mousset-Jones, P. 1993. Modeling of the Ventilation for 
Emplacement Drift Re-Entry and Rock Drying. High Level Radioactive Waste 
Management, Proceedings of the Fourth Annual International Conference, Las 
Vegas, Nevada, April 26-30, 1993. 1, 590-599. La Grange Park, Illinois: American 
Nuclear Society. TIC: 208542. 
100282 DOE (U.S. Department of Energy) 1988. Site Characterization Plan Yucca Mountain 
Site, Nevada Research and Development Area, Nevada. DOE/RW-0199. Nine 
volumes. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Civilian 
Radioactive Waste Management. ACC: HQO.19881201.0002. 
130104 DOE (U.S. Department of Energy) 1995. In-Situ Thermal Testing Program Strategy. 
DOE/YMSCO-003. Las Vegas, NV: YMSCO. TIC: 215726. 
159475 DOE (U.S. Department of Energy) 2002. Quality Assurance Requirements and 
Description. DOE/RW-0333P, Rev. 12. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of 
Energy, Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management. ACC: 
MOL.20020819.0387. 
100673 Flint, L.E. 1996. Matrix Properties of Hydrogeologic Units at Yucca Mountain, 
Nevada. Milestone 3GUP603M. Denver, Colorado: U.S. Geological Survey. ACC: 
MOL.19970324.0046. 
100033 Flint, L.E. 1998. Characterization of Hydrogeologic Units Using Matrix Properties, 
Yucca Mountain, Nevada. Water-Resources Investigations Report 97-4243. Denver, 
Colorado: U.S. Geological Survey. ACC: MOL.19980429.0512. 
159098 Freifeld, B. and Tsang, Y.W. 1998. Active Hydrological Testing. Chapter 2 of 
First Quarter TDIF Submission for the Drift Scale Test (Hydrological, Radar, 
Microseismic), Version 1.0. Milestone SP2770M4. Berkeley, California: Lawrence 
Berkeley National Laboratory. ACC: MOL.19980812.0239.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 8-4 September 2002 
158429 GS970608314224.006. Provisional Results: Geotechnical Data for Alcove 5 
(DWFA), Main Drift of the ESF: Detailed Line Survey Data for the Heated Drift and 
Cross Drift. Submittal date: 06/24/1997. 
100814 Harrar, J.E.; Carley, J.F.; Isherwood, W.F.; and Raber, E. 1990. Report of the 
Committee to Review the Use of J-13 Well Water in Nevada Nuclear Waste Storage 
Investigations. UCID-21867. Livermore, California: Lawrence Livermore National 
Laboratory. ACC: NNA.19910131.0274. 
159108 Horita, J. and Wesolowski, D.J. 1994. Liquid-Vapor Fractionation of Oxygen and 
Hydrogen Isotopes of Water from the Freezing to the Critical Temperature. 
Geochemica et Cosmochimica Acta, 58, (16), 3425-3437. New York, New York: 
Elsevier. TIC: 240153. 
101868 Hvorslev, M.J. 1951. Time Lag and Soil Permeability in Ground-Water 
Observations. AEWES Bulletin 36. Vicksburg, Mississippi: U.S. Army Corps of 
Engineers, Waterways Experiment Station. TIC: 238956. 
158278 LA0002FH6001WP.001. Single Heater Test - Raw Data. Submittal date: 
02/25/2000. 
158230 LA0106FH831151.002. Large Block Test Data. Submittal date: 06/06/2001. 
158229 LA0106FH831151.003. Large Block Temperature Data. Submittal date: 
06/06/2001. 
158317 LA0111FH831151.002. Drift Scale Test (DST), Raw Data Sets. Submittal date: 
11/06/2001. 
159515 LA0208FH831151.001. DST DCS Raw Data (All) Includes SNO5 Raw. Submittal 
date: 08/08/2002. 
159308 LA0208FH831151.002. ESF Drift Scale Test, ESF DCS Data TCO Hourly. 
Submittal date: 08/08/2002. 
158319 LA9908FH6001WP.001. Drift Scale Test-Raw Data. Submittal date: 08/31/1999. 
159047 LaBrecque, D.J.; Ramirez, A.L.; Daily, W.D.; Binley, A.M.; and Schima, S.A. 1996. 
ERT Monitoring of Environmental Remediation Processes. Measurement and 
Science Technology, 7, ([3]), 375-383. [Bristol, England]: IOP Publishing. TIC: 
236228. 
101393 Lin, W. and Daily, W. 1984. Transport Properties of Topopah Spring Tuff. UCRL- 
53602. Livermore, California: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. ACC: 
NNA.19891026.0025.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 8-5 September 2002 
159069 Lin, W.; Blair, S.C.; Wilder, D.; Carlson, S.; Wagoner, J.; DeLoach, L.; Danko, G.; 
Ramirez, A.L.; and Lee, K. 2001. Large Block Test Final Report. UCRL-ID- 
132246, Rev. 2. Livermore, California: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. 
TIC: 252918. 
159099 Lin, W.; Roberts, R.; Carlberg, E.; Ruddle, D.; and Pletcher, R. 2002. Moisture 
Retention Curves of Topopah Spring Tuff at Elevated Temperatures. UCRL-ID- 
146579. Livermore, California: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. TIC: 
253211. 
157900 Lowry, W.E. 2001. Engineered Barrier Systems Thermal-Hydraulic-Chemical 
Column Test Report. TDR-EBS-MD-000018 REV 00. Las Vegas, Nevada: Bechtel 
SAIC Company. ACC: MOL.20020102.0206. 
159132 Lum, C.C. 1997. Complete Scanline Mapping of Drift Scale Test Area. Milestone 
SP5140M4. Albuquerque, New Mexico: Sandia National Laboratories. ACC: 
MOL.19971120.0002. 
159101 Majer, E.L. and McEvilly, T.V. 1985. Acoustic Emission and Wave Propagation 
Monitoring at the Spent Fuel Test: Climax, Nevada. International Journal of Rock 
Mechanics and Mining Sciences and Geomechanics Abstracts, 22, (4), 215-226. 
[New York, New York: Elsevier]. TIC: 222776. 
159518 Mitchell, A. 1996. Borehole Videos from the Exploratory Studies Facility Thermal 
Testing Facility-Thermomechanical Alcove. Memorandum from A. Mitchell 
(LANL) to Distribution, May 21, 1996, LA-EES-13-LV-05-96-021, with attachment 
ACC: MOL.19960711.0110. 
159514 Pannell, G. 2001. Heat Loss White Paper for KTI KTE0201. E-mail from G. 
Pannell to C. Gardner, April 4, 2001, with attachment. ACC: MOL.20010822.0143. 
101698 Peterson, J.E. 1986. The Application of Algebraic Reconstruction Techniques to 
Geophysical Problems. LBL-21498. Berkeley, California: Lawrence Berkeley 
National Laboratory. TIC: 239765. 
159102 Peterson, J.E., Jr. and Williams, K.H. 1998. Acoustic Emission/Seismic Wave 
Monitoring Baseline Data. Chapter 5 of ESF Drift Scale Test As-Built Data and 
Baseline Measurements (Hydrological, Radar, and Microseismic), Revision 1.0. 
Milestone SPY193M4. Berkeley, California: Lawrence Berkeley National 
Laboratory. ACC: MOL.19981016.0046. 
159128 Peterson, J.E., Jr. and Williams, K.H. 1998. Pre-Heating Ground Penetrating Radar 
Baseline Data. Chapter 4 of ESF Drift Scale Test As-Built Data and Baseline 
Measurements (Hydrological, Radar, and Microseismic), Revision 1.0. Milestone 
SPY193M4. Berkeley, California: Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. ACC: 
MOL.19981016.0046.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 8-6 September 2002 
159120 Peterson, J.E., Jr. and Williams, K.H. 1998. Radar Imaging at the Drift Scale Heater 
Test. Chapter 4 of First Quarter TDIF Submission for the Drift Scale Test 
(Hydrological, Radar, Microseismic), Version 1.0. Milestone SP2770M4. Berkeley, 
California: Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. ACC: MOL.19980812.0239. 
159100 Roberts, J.J. and Lin, W. 1995. Hydrological Property Measurements of Topopah 
Spring Tuff. UCRL-ID-119033. Livermore, California: Lawrence Livermore 
National Laboratory. ACC: MOV.19980504.0004. 
159048 Roberts, J.J. and Lin, W. 1995. Report on Laboratory Tests of Drying and Re- 
Wetting of Intact Rocks. UCRL-ID-121513. Livermore, California: Lawrence 
Livermore National Laboratory. ACC: MOL.19960404.0013. 
101710 Roberts, J.J. and Lin, W. 1997. Electrical Properties of Partially Saturated Topopah 
Spring Tuff: Water Distribution as a Function of Saturation. Water Resources 
Research, 33, (4), 577-587. Washington, D.C.: American Geophysical Union. TIC: 
239736. 
117471 SNL (Sandia National Laboratories) 1997. Unconfined Compression Tests on 
Specimens from the Drift Scale Test Area of the Exploratory Studies Facility at Yucca 
Mountain, Nevada. Albuquerque, New Mexico: Sandia National Laboratories. 
ACC: MOL.19971120.0014. 
118788 SNL (Sandia National Laboratories) 1998. Laboratory Measurements of Thermal 
Conductivity as a Function of Saturation State for Welded and Nonwelded Tuff 
Specimens. Albuquerque, New Mexico: Sandia National Laboratories. ACC: 
MOL.19980901.0177. 
100646 Tsang, Y.W. and Cook, P. 1997. Ambient Characterization of the ESF Drift Scale 
Test Area by Field Air Permeability Measurements. Milestone SP9512M4. 
Berkeley, California: Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. ACC: 
MOL.19971201.0829. 
105774 Tsang, Y.W. and Freifeld, B. 1998. Hydrological Baseline Measurements. Chapter 
2 of ESF Drift Scale Test As-Built Data and Baseline Measurements (Hydrological, 
Radar, and Microseismic). Milestone SPY193M4, Rev. 1. Berkeley, California: 
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. ACC: MOL.19981016.0046. 
159097 Tsang, Y.W. and Freifeld, B. 1998. Hydrological Characterization Data. Chapter 3 
of ESF Drift Scale Test As-Built Data and Baseline Measurements (Hydrological, 
Radar, and Microseismic). Milestone SPY193M4, Rev. 1. Berkeley, California: 
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. ACC: MOL.19981016.0046. 
101736 Waxman, M.H. and Thomas, E.C. 1974. Electrical Conductivities in Shaly Sands: 
I. The Relation Between Hydrocarbon Saturation and Resistivity Index; II. The 
Temperature Coefficient of Electrical Conductivity. Journal of Petroleum

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 8-7 September 2002 
Technology, 26, 213-225. Dallas, Texas: Society of Petroleum Engineers. TIC: 
239699. 
159121 Williams, K.H. and Peterson, J.E., Jr. 1998. Radar Imaging and Acoustic Emission 
Monitoring: Second Quarter Progress. Chapter 4 of Second Quarter TDIF 
Submission for the Drift Scale Test (Hydrological, Radar, Microseismic), Version 0.0. 
Milestone SP2790M4. Berkeley, California: Lawrence Berkeley National 
Laboratory. ACC: MOL.19980812.0240. 
159104 Williams, K.H.; Majer, E.; and Peterson, J.E., Jr. 1998. Acoustic Emission 
Monitoring/Seismic Wave Monitoring: First Quarter Data. Chapter 5 of First 
Quarter TDIF Submission for the Drift Scale Test (Hydrological, Radar, 
Microseismic), Version 1.0. Milestone SP2770M4. Berkeley, California: Lawrence 
Berkeley National Laboratory. ACC: MOL.19980812.0239. 
159516 Williams, N.H. 2001. Contract #: DE-AC08-01NV12101 - Drift Scale Test (DST) 
White Paper: Scaling Along the Roof of the Heated Drift. Letter from N.H. 
Williams (BSC) to S.P. Mellington (DOE/YMSCO), May 15, 2001, PROJ.05/01.033, 
with enclosure. ACC: MOL.20010622.0252. 
100194 Yang, I.C.; Rattray, G.W.; and Yu, P. 1996. Interpretation of Chemical and Isotopic 
Data from Boreholes in the Unsaturated Zone at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. Water- 
Resources Investigations Report 96-4058. Denver, Colorado: U.S. Geological 
Survey. ACC: MOL.19980528.0216. 
158176 YMP (Yucca Mountain Site Characterization Project) 2002. Effects of Introduced 
Materials in the Drift Scale Test. North Las Vegas, Nevada: Yucca Mountain Site 
Characterization Office. ACC: MOL.20020304.0044. 
8.2 CODES, STANDARDS, REGULATIONS, AND PROCEDURES 
033-YMP-QP-3.8, Rev. 1. Control of the Electronic Management of Information. Livermore, 
California: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. ACC: MOL.20020108.0169. 
AP-2.14Q, Rev. 2, ICN 1. Review of Technical Products and Data. Washington, D.C.: U.S. 
Department of Energy, Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management. ACC: 
MOL.20020701.0183. 
AP-2.22Q, Rev. 0. Classification Criteria And Maintenance Of The Monitored Geologic 
Repository Q-List. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Civilian 
Radioactive Waste Management. ACC: MOL.20020314.0046 
AP-2.27Q, Rev. 0. Planning for Science Activities. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of 
Energy, Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management. ACC: MOL.20020701.0184

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 8-8 September 2002 
AP-3.15Q, Rev. 3, ICN 3. Managing Technical Product Inputs. Washington, D.C.: U.S. 
Department of Energy, Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management. ACC: 
MOL.20020830.0001. 
AP-6.1Q, Rev. 6, ICN 5. Controlled Distribution. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of 
Energy, Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management. ACC: MOL.20020813.0055. 
AP-7.5Q, Rev. 1. Submittal, Review, and Acceptance of Deliverables. Washington, D.C.: U.S. 
Department of Energy, Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management. ACC: 
MOL.20020701.0181. 
AP-17.1Q, Rev. 2, ICN 3. Record Source Responsibilities for Inclusionary Records. 
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste 
Management. ACC: MOL.20020813.0054. 
AP-32.4, Rev. 0, ICN 1, BSCN 1. Records Retention and Disposition. Washington, D.C.: U.S. 
Department of Energy, Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management. ACC: 
MOL.20010212.0274. 
AP-SI.1Q, Rev. 3, ICN 4. Software Management. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of 
Energy, Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management. ACC: MOL.20020520.0283. 
AP-SIII.1Q, Rev. 1, ICN 1. Scientific Notebooks. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of 
Energy, Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management. ACC: MOL.20010905.0138. 
AP-SIII.3Q, Rev. 1, ICN 2. Submittal And Incorporation Of Data To The Technical Data 
Management System. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Civilian 
Radioactive Waste Management. ACC: MOL.20020701.0177 
AP-SIII.7Q, Rev. 0, ICN 1. Scientific Investigation Laboratory and Field Testing. Washington, 
D.C.: U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management. ACC: 
MOL.20020701.0180. 
AP-SIII.9Q, Rev. 0, ICN 1. Scientific Analyses. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Energy, 
Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management. ACC: MOL.20020404.0083. 
AP-SV.1Q, Rev. 0, ICN 2. Control of the Electronic Management of Information. Washington, 
D.C.: U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management. ACC: 
MOL.20000831.0065. 
ASTM D 4971-89. 1989. Standard Test Method for Determining the In Situ Modulus of 
Deformation of Rock Using the Diametrically Loaded 76-mm (3-in.) Borehole Jack. 
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: American Society for Testing and Materials. TIC: 245311. 
LANL-YMP-QP-S5.01, Rev. 1. Electronic Information Management. Los Alamos, [New 
Mexico]: Los Alamos National Laboratory. ACC: MOL.20020613.0394.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 8-9 September 2002 
NWM-USGS-GCP-03, Rev. 4, Mod. 0. Uranium-Thorium Disequilibrium Studies. Denver, 
Colorado: U.S. Geological Survey. ACC: MOL.19990723.0011. 
NWM-USGS-GCP-12 Rev. 4, Mod. 1. Rb-Sr Isotope Geochemistry. Denver, Colorado: U.S. 
Geological Survey. ACC: MOL.19990825.0067. 
NWM-USGS-GP-32, Rev. 0. Underground Geologic Mapping. Denver, Colorado: U.S. 
Geological Survey. ACC: MOL.19941102.0023. 
TIP-AC-02, Rev. 0. Solutions Analysis Cations by Inductively Coupled Plasma Atomic Emission 
Spectroscopy (ICP/AES). Livermore, California: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. 
ACC: MOL.20010618.0439. 
TIP-AC-03, Rev. 0. Determination of Inorganic Anions by Ion Chromatography (EPA Method 
300.00). Livermore, California: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. ACC: 
MOL.20010315.0345. 
TIP-NF-33, Rev. 0. Collection and Field Analysis of Water Samples from Boreholes In the 
Exploratory Studies Facility. Livermore, California: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. 
ACC: MOL.20010110.0463. 
YMP-LBNL-QIP-6.1, Rev. 8, Mod. 0. Document Review. Berkeley, California: Lawrence 
Berkeley National Laboratory. Submitted to the RPC. 
YMP-LBNL-QIP-SV.0, Rev. 2, Mod. 1. Management of YMP-LBNL Electronic Data. 
Berkeley, California: Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. ACC: MOL.20020717.0319. 
YMP-LBNL-TIP/AFT-2.0, Rev. 1, Mod. 0. Determination of Moisture Content, Bulk Density, 
Porosity and Particle Density of Rock Samples. Berkeley, California: Lawrence Berkeley 
National Laboratory. ACC: MOL.20020717.0323. 
YMP-LBNL-TIP/TT-4.0, Rev. 1, Mod. 0. Acoustic Emission Monitoring/Seismic Wave 
Monitoring. Berkeley, California: Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. ACC: 
MOL.20020717.0323. 
YMP-LBNL-TIP/TT-7.0, Rev. 0, Mod. 0. Extraction and Analysis of the Stable Isotope 
Components of CO2 in Gas Samples. Berkeley, California: Lawrence Berkeley National 
Laboratory. ACC: MOL.19990205.0145. 
YMP-LBNL-TIP/TT-9.0, Rev. 0, Mod. 0. Hydrogen Isotope Analyses of Waters. Berkeley, 
California: Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. ACC: MOL.19990318.0083. 
YMP-LBNL-TIP/TT-10.0, Rev. 0, Mod. 0. Analysis of the Oxygen Isotopic Composition of 
Water Samples using the ISOPREP 18. Berkeley, California: Lawrence Berkeley National 
Laboratory. ACC: MOL.19990224.0638.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 8-10 September 2002 
8.3 SOURCE DATA, LISTED BY DATA TRACKING NUMBER 
159136 GS011108312322.008. Uranium Concentrations and 234U/238U Activity Ratios 
Analyzed between February 1, 1999, and August 1, 2001 for Drift-Scale Heater Test 
Water Collected between June 1998 and April 2001, and Pore Water Collected 
between March 1996 and April 1999. Submittal date: 12/19/2001. 
159137 GS011108312322.009. Strontium Isotope Ratios and Strontium Concentrations in 
Water Samples from the Drift Scale Test Analyzed from March 16, 1999 to June 27, 
2001. Submittal date: 02/07/2002. 
158430 GS970608314224.007. Provisional Results: Geotechnical Data for the Exploratory 
Studies Facility, Main Drift, Alcove 5 (DWFA): Heated Drift and Cross Drift Full 
Periphery Geotechnical Map (Drawing OA-46-300) and Rock Mass Quality Ratings 
Report. Submittal date: 06/24/1997. 
153485 LA0009SL831151.001. Fracture Mineralogy of the ESF Single Heater Test Block, 
Alcove 5. Submittal date: 09/28/2000. 
158426 LA0201SL831225.001. Chemical, Textural, and Mineralogical Characteristics of 
Sidewall Samples from the Drift Scale Test. Submittal date: 01/10/2002. 
146449 LA9912SL831151.002. Percent Coverage by Fracture-Coating Minerals in Core 
ESF-HD-TEMP-2. Submittal date: 01/05/2000. 
158431 LARO831422AQ97.002. Exploratory Studies Facility Test Coordination Office 
Notebook #2 for Borehole Wireline Measurements. Submittal date: 08/27/1999. 
158335 LB000121123142.001. Passive Monitoring Data Collected from 12 Hydrology Holes 
of the ESF Drift Scale Test for the Period June 1, 1999 through October 31, 1999. 
Submittal date: 01/21/2000. 
158337 LB000121123142.002. Active Hydrology Testing Data (Air Injection) Collected 
from 12 Hydrology Holes of the ESF Drift Scale Test for the Period June 1, 1999 
through October 31, 1999. Submittal date: 01/21/2000. 
146451 LB000121123142.003. Isotope Data for CO2 Gas Samples Collected From the 
Hydrology Holes of the ESF Drift Scale Test for the Period August 9, 1999 through 
November 30, 1999. Submittal date: 01/21/2000. 
158338 LB000121123142.004. Ground Penetrating Radar Data Collected from Boreholes of 
the ESF Drift Scale Test for the Period June 1, 1999 to October 31, 1999. Submittal 
date: 01/21/2000.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 8-11 September 2002 
158339 LB000121123142.005. Acoustic Emission Data Collected from Boreholes of the 
ESF Drift Scale Test for the Period December 21, 1998 through October 27, 1999. 
Submittal date: 01/21/2000. 
158340 LB000718123142.001. Passive Monitoring Data Collected from 12 Hydrology Holes 
of the ESF Drift Scale Test for the Period November 1, 1999 through May 31, 2000. 
Submittal date: 07/18/2000. 
158341 LB000718123142.002. Active Hydrology Testing Data (Air Injection) Collected 
from 12 Hydrology Holes of the ESF Drift Scale Test for the Period November 1, 
1999 through May 31, 2000. Submittal date: 07/18/2000. 
158342 LB000718123142.003. Isotope Data for CO2 Gas Samples Collected from the 
Hydrology Holes of the ESF Drift Scale Test for the Period April 18, 2000 through 
April 19, 2000. Submittal date: 07/18/2000. 
153354 LB000718123142.004. Ground Penetrating Radar Data Collected from Boreholes of 
the ESF Drift Scale Test on April 13, 2000. Submittal date: 07/18/2000. 
158343 LB000718123142.005. Acoustic Emission Data Collected from Boreholes of the 
ESF Drift Scale Test for the Period October 27, 1999 through March 21, 2000. 
Submittal date: 07/18/2000. 
158344 LB0101ACEMDST1.001. Acoustic Emission Data Collected from Boreholes of the 
ESF Drift Scale Test for 04/13/00-07/02/00. Submittal date: 01/19/2001. 
158345 LB0101AIRKDST1.001. Active Air K Testing Data Collected from 12 Hydrology 
Holes of the ESF Drift Scale Test for 7/24/00-7/28/00 and 10/18/00-10/27/00. 
Submittal date: 01/19/2001. 
158346 LB0101GPRDST01.001. GPR Data Collected from Boreholes of the ESF Drift Scale 
Test on September 27-28, 2000. Submittal date: 01/19/2001. 
158347 LB0101H2ODST01.001. Passive Monitoring Data-Pressure, Temperature, and 
Humidity - in the ESF DST Hydrology Holes (6/01/00-11/30/00). Submittal date: 
01/12/2001. 
159306 LB0102CO2DST98.001. Concentration Data for CO2 from Gas Samples Collected 
from Hydrology Holes in Drift-scale Test. Submittal date: 02/28/2001. 
158437 LB0108ACEMDST5.001. Drift Scale Test Acoustic Emission Data. Submittal date: 
10/29/2001. 
158438 LB0108AIRKDST5.001. Active Air-K Testing. Submittal date: 08/27/2001.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 8-12 September 2002 
156888 LB0108CO2DST05.001. Concentration and Isotope Data for CO2 and H2O from 
Gas Samples Collected from Hydrology Holes in Drift-Scale Test - May and August 
1999, April 2000, January and April 2001. Submittal date: 08/27/2001. 
158440 LB0108GPRDST05.001. Drift Scale Test Ground Penetrating Radar Data for 
February 2001. Submittal date: 08/27/2001. 
158441 LB0108H2ODST05.001. DST Monitoring Data - Temperature, Pressure, Humidity. 
Submittal date: 08/27/2001. 
158348 LB0203AIRKDSTE.001. Active Air-K Testing, Sept. 2001 - Jan. 2002. Submittal 
date: 03/13/2002. 
158349 LB0203CO2DSTEH.001. Concentration/Isotope Data for CO2/H2O from Gas 
Samples Collected from Hydrology Holes in DST up to End of Heating. Submittal 
date: 03/13/2002. 
158350 LB0203GPRDSTEH.001. Drift Scale Test Ground Penetrating Radar Data for June 
2001 - Jan. 2002, Prior to End of Heating. Submittal date: 03/13/2002. 
158351 LB0203H2ODSTEH.001. DST Monitoring Data - Temperature, Pressure, Humidity; 
Jun. 2001 - Jan. 2002. Submittal date: 03/13/2002. 
159543 LB0204SHAIRK3Q.001. Single Heater Test Air-K (March-May 97). Submittal 
date: 04/16/2002. 
159303 LB0206C14DSTEH.001. Carbon 14 Isotope Data from CO2 Gas Samples Collected 
from DST. Submittal date: 06/17/2002. 
105587 LB960500834244.001. Hydrological Characterization of the Single Heater Test Area 
in ESF. Submittal date: 08/23/1996. 
158287 LB970100123142.001. Air Injections in Boreholes #16 and #18 in the Single Heater 
Test Area. Submittal date: 01/17/1997. 
158288 LB970100123142.002. Infrared Images in the Single Heater Test Area. Submittal 
date: 01/17/1997. 
158289 LB970400123142.001. Images for Second Quarter Results of Infrared Mapping in 
the Single Heater Test Area. Submittal date: 04/18/1997. 
158293 LB970500123142.001. Air Injection Data in Boreholes #16 and #18 in the Single 
Heater Test Area. Submittal date: 05/23/1997.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 8-13 September 2002 
131500 LB970500123142.003. Laboratory Test Results of Hydrological Properties from Dry 
Drilled and Wet Drilled Cores in the Drift Scale Test Area and in the Single Heater 
Test Area of the Thermal Test Facility. Submittal date: 05/30/1997. 
105589 LB970600123142.001. Ambient Characterization of the ESF Drift Scale Test Area 
by Field Air Permeability Measurements. Submittal date: 06/13/1997. 
158295 LB970700123142.002. Third Quarter IR Pictures of the Single Heater Test Area. 
Submittal date: 07/17/1997. 
118965 LB971000123142.001. Air Injections in Boreholes #16 and #18 in the Single Heater 
Test Area. Submittal date: 10/17/1997. 
158296 LB971000123142.002. Fourth Quarter FY 97 IR Pictures of the Single Heater Test 
Area. Submittal date: 10/17/1997. 
158297 LB980120123142.001. First Quarter FY98 IR Pictures of the Single Heater Test 
Area. Submittal date: 01/20/1998. 
105590 LB980120123142.004. Air Injections in Boreholes 57 through 61, 74 through 78, 
185 and 186 in the Drift Scale Test Area. Submittal date: 01/20/1998. 
114134 LB980120123142.005. Hydrological Characterization by Air Injections Tests in 
Boreholes in Heated Drift in DST. Submittal date: 01/20/1998. 
158352 LB980120123142.007. Data Represents the Measurement of Discrete Acoustic 
Energy of the Rock Measured Prior to Turning on the Heaters in the SHT. Submittal 
date: 01/20/1998. 
158280 LB980120123142.008. Data from Letter Report on First Quarter Results of 
Measurements in Hydrology Holes in the Single Heater Test Area, FY1998.. 
Submittal date: 05/28/1999. 
113696 LB980420123142.001. Passive Monitoring Data for Hydrology Holes (Boreholes 
57-61, 74-78, 185-186) Taken from November, 1997 to February, 1998. Submittal 
date: 04/20/1998. 
113706 LB980420123142.002. Active Hydrology Testing Data in Boreholes 57-61, 74-78, 
and 185-186; Air Injection Tests and Gas Tracer Tests. Submittal date: 04/20/1998. 
113717 LB980420123142.004. Acoustic Emission Data (Recorded Events and Calibration 
Files). Submittal date: 04/20/1998. 
111471 LB980420123142.005. Isotope Data for CO2 from Gas Samples Collected from 
Drift Scale Test February 1998 in First Quarter TDIF Submission for the Drift Scale 
Test. Submittal date: 11/12/1998.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 8-14 September 2002 
113733 LB980715123142.001. Passive Monitoring Data from Hydrology Holes (Boreholes 
57-61, 74-78, 185-186) from March 1998 to May 1998 in 2nd Quarter TDIF 
Submission of the Drift Scale Test Heating Phase. Submittal date: 07/15/1998. 
113742 LB980715123142.002. Active Hydrology Testing Data in Boreholes 57-61, 74-78, 
and 185-186; Air Injection Tests and Gas Tracer Tests in 2ND Quarter TDIF 
Submission of the Drift Scale Test Heating Phase. Submittal date: 07/15/1998. 
111472 LB980715123142.003. Isotope Data for CO2 from Gas Samples Collected from 
Drift Scale Test June 4, 1998 in 2nd Quarter TDIF Submission of the Drift Scale Test 
Heating Phase. Submittal date: 07/15/1998. 
118999 LB980901123142.001. Active Hydrology Testing Data in Boreholes 16 and 18. 
Submittal date: 08/26/1998. 
119009 LB980901123142.002. Passive Monitoring Data (Temperature, Relative Humidity, 
and Gauge Pressure) for the Final TDIF Submittal for the Single Heater Test. 
Submittal date: 08/26/1998. 
119016 LB980901123142.003. Ground Penetrating Radar Data for Final TDIF Submittal for 
the Single Heater Test. Submittal date: 08/26/1998. 
119029 LB980901123142.006. Laboratory Test Results of Hydrological Properties from 
Post-Test Dry-Drilled Cores in the Single Heater Test Area for the Final TDIF 
Submittal for the Single Heater Test. Submittal date: 08/31/1998. 
105593 LB980912332245.002. Gas Tracer Data from Niche 3107 of the ESF. Submittal 
date: 09/30/1998. 
158353 LB981016123142.001. Passive Monitoring Data (Humidity, Pressure, Temperature) 
from Boreholes 57-61, 74-78, 185-186 Taken from June 1998 to August 1998 for the 
Third Quarter TDIF Submission for the Drift Scale Test. Submittal date: 
10/16/1998. 
129245 LB981016123142.002. Active Hydrology Testing Data (Air Injection) from 
Boreholes 57-61, 74-78, 185-186 Taken from August 1998 to September 1998 for the 
Third Quarter TDIF Submission for the Drift Scale Test. Submittal date: 
10/16/1998. 
113278 LB981016123142.004. Isotope Data for CO2 from Gas and Water Samples Taken 
from June 1998 to September 1998 for the Third Quarter TDIF Submission for the 
Drift Scale Test. Submittal date: 10/16/1998. 
129247 LB990630123142.001. Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Quarters TDIF Submission for the 
Drift Scale Test, September 1998 to May 1999. Submittal date: 06/30/1999.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 8-15 September 2002 
158355 LB990630123142.002. Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Quarters TDIF Submission for the 
Drift Scale Test, September 1998 to May 1999. Submittal date: 06/30/1999. 
111476 LB990630123142.003. Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Quarters TDIF Submission for the 
Drift Scale Test, September 1998 to May 1999. Submittal date: 06/30/1999. 
158360 LB990630123142.004. Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Quarters TDIF Submission for the 
Drift Scale Test, September 1998 to May 1999. Submittal date: 07/20/1999. 
129274 LB990630123142.005. Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Quarters TDIF Submission for the 
Drift Scale Test, September 1998 to May 1999. Submittal date: 07/20/1999. 
158325 LL000804023142.009. Liquid Saturation Tomographs for the ESF Drift Scale Test 
(DST) Determined from ERT Measurements. Submittal date: 08/04/2000. 
153288 LL001100931031.008. Aqueous Chemistry of Water Sampled from Boreholes of the 
Drift Scale Test (DST). Submittal date: 11/10/2000. 
153616 LL001200231031.009. Aqueous Chemistry of Water Sampled from Boreholes of the 
Drift Scale Test (DST). Submittal date: 12/04/2000. 
159134 LL020302223142.015. Aqueous Geochemistry of DST Samples Collected from 
HYD Boreholes. Submittal date: 03/07/2002. 
159307 LL020405123142.019. Aqueous Geochemistry of Condensed Fluids Collected 
During Studies of Introduced Materials. Submittal date: 05/22/2002. 
159105 LL020502523142.020. Electrical Properties of Topopah Spring Tuff as a Function of 
Saturation and Temperature. Submittal date: 07/05/2002. 
159551 LL020710223142.024. Moisture Content of Rock from Neutron Logging Activities 
in the Drift Scale Test (DST): August 1997 through May 2002. Submittal date: 
08/20/2002. 
158237 LL950812704242.017. Report on Laboratory Tests of Drying and Re-Wetting of 
Intact Rocks. Submittal date: 08/07/1995. 
158271 LL960400404244.012. Fracture Mapping of the East Side of the Large Block Test. 
Submittal date: 04/01/1996. 
158274 LL960400504244.013. Fracture Mapping of the South Side of the Large Block Test. 
Submittal date: 04/01/1996. 
158275 LL960400604244.014. Fracture Mapping of the West Side of the Large Block Test. 
Submittal date: 04/01/1996.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 8-16 September 2002 
158276 LL960400704244.015. Fracture Mapping of the North Side of the Large Block Test. 
Submittal date: 04/01/1996. 
158244 LL960905204244.022. Permeability Measurements on an Intact Core Sample from 
the Large Block Test. Submittal date: 09/24/1996. 
158281 LL970101004244.026. First Quarter Results of ERT Measurements in the Single 
Heater Test. Submittal date: 01/08/1997. 
158309 LL970101104244.027. First Quarter Results of Chemical Measurements in the 
Single Heater Test. Submittal date: 01/08/1997. 
111481 LL970409604244.030. Second Quarter Results of Chemical Measurements in the 
Single Heater Test. Submittal date: 04/17/1997. 
148609 LL970505404244.031. Second and Third Quarter Results of ERT Measurements for 
Single Heater Test. Submittal date: 05/23/1997. 
111482 LL970703904244.034. Third Quarter Results of Chemical Measurements in the 
Single Heater Test. Submittal date: 07/15/1997. 
127312 LL970709004244.035. Single Heater Test Samples (SHT) Showing Porosity, 
Relative Humidity and Water Saturation and Drift Scale Test Samples (DST) 
Showing Porosity, Matrix Potential and Water Saturation. Submittal date: 
07/31/1997. 
158313 LL970805504244.043. XYZ of Instruments in Single Heater Test (SHT) in RTD 
Holes 15, 17, 22, and 23; Packer Holes 16 and 18; Chemistry Holes 20 and 21. 
Submittal date: 08/14/1997. 
158286 LL971002904244.044. Fourth Quarter FY97 Results of ERT Measurements in the 
Single Heater Test. Submittal date: 10/13/1997. 
148611 LL971006604244.046. Fourth Quarter FY97 Results of Chemical Measurements in 
the Single Heater Test (SHT). Submittal date: 10/21/1997. 
113894 LL971204304244.047. Neutron Logging Activities at the Large Block Test (LBT). 
Submittal date: 12/08/1997. 
148610 LL980105204244.049. First Quarter FY98 Results of ERT Measurements in the 
Single Heater Test. Submittal date: 01/13/1998. 
118963 LL980106904244.051. First Quarter FY98 Results of the Neutron Logging Report. 
Submittal date: 01/16/1998.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 8-17 September 2002 
158332 LL980108804244.052. Electrical Resistivity Tomography (ERT) Monitoring of the 
Drift Scale Test. Submittal date: 01/22/1998. 
158299 LL980109904243.015. Fourth Quarter FY 1997 and First Quarter FY 1998 Data on 
the O-MPBX at the Single Heater Test (SHT). Submittal date: 01/26/1998. 
113782 LL980406404244.057. First and Second Quarter FY98 Results of ERT 
Measurements in the Drift Scale Test. Submittal date: 04/14/1998. 
159107 LL980411004244.060. DST Baseline REKA Probe Measurements. Submittal date: 
04/24/1998. 
159111 LL980411104244.061. DST Baseline REKA Probe Measurements for Thermal 
Conductivity and Diffusivity. Submittal date: 04/24/1998. 
113791 LL980808604244.065. Second Quarter FY98 Results of ERT Measurements in the 
Drift Scale Test. Submittal date: 08/21/1998. 
159109 LL980902104244.070. DST Baseline REKA Probe Measurements for Thermal 
Conductivity and Diffusivity. Submittal date: 09/03/1998. 
145385 LL980913304244.072. Data Submission Report for Electrical Resistance 
Tomography Results Obtained During the Large Block Test FY98. Submittal date: 
09/24/1998. 
135872 LL980918904244.074. Temperature, Relative Humidity and Gas Pressure Results 
During the Large Block Test FY 98. Submittal date: 09/29/1998. 
145099 LL980919304244.075. Neutron Logging Activities at the Large Block Test (LBT). 
Submittal date: 09/30/1998. 
148630 LL980919404244.076. Measurement of the Sensor Displacement While Heating the 
Large Block at the Large Block Test FY98. Submittal date: 09/30/1998. 
158261 LL981001604244.079. The Imaging of the Resistivity Distribution Between Two 
Boreholes using an Automatic Data Collection and Switching System. Submittal 
date: 10/05/1998. 
118959 LL981109904242.072. Electrical Properties of Tuff from the ESF as a Function of 
Water Saturation and Temperature. Submittal date: 11/19/1998. 
158270 LL981202305912.004. Investigation of Bacterial Transport in the Large Block Test, 
a Thermally Perturbed Block of Topopah Spring Tuff. Submittal date: 12/03/1998. 
158263 LL981208404244.092. X-Ray Radiography of Fracture Flow and Matrix Imbibition 
in Topopah Spring Tuff Under a Thermal Gradient. Submittal date: 12/08/1998.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 8-18 September 2002 
113872 LL990702704244.099. Data for the Drift Scale Test. Submittal date: 07/13/1999. 
153836 MO0001SEPDSTPC.000. Drift Scale Test (DST) Temperature, Power, Current, and 
Voltage Data for June 1, 1999 through October 31, 1999. Submittal date: 
01/12/2000. 
147304 MO0002ABBLSLDS.000. As-Built Borehole Locations and Sensor Locations for 
the Drift Scale Test Given in Local (DST) Coordinates. Submittal date: 02/01/2000. 
150930 MO0005PORWATER.000. Perm-Sample Pore Water Data. Submittal date: 
05/04/2000. 
153707 MO0007SEPDSTPC.001. Drift Scale Test (DST) Temperature, Power, Current, and 
Voltage Data for November 1, 1999 through May 31, 2000. Submittal date: 
07/13/2000. 
153708 MO0012SEPDSTPC.002. Drift Scale Test (DST) Temperature, Power, Current, and 
Voltage Data for June 1, 2000 through November 30, 2000. Submittal date: 
12/19/2000. 
153711 O0101SEPFDDST.000. Field Measured Data of Water Samples from the Drift Scale 
Test. Submittal date: 01/03/2001. 
158321 MO0107SEPDSTPC.003. Drift Scale Test (DST) Temperature, Power, Current, and 
Voltage Data for December 1, 2000 through May 31, 2001. Submittal date: 
07/06/2001. 
158320 MO0202SEPDSTTV.001. Drift Scale Test (DST) Temperature, Power, Current, and 
Voltage Data for June 1, 2001 through January 14, 2002. Submittal date: 
02/28/2002. 
159300 MO0207AL5WATER.001. Water Sampling in Alcove 5 (Results from 2/4/1997 
through 4/20/1999). Submittal date: 07/11/2002. 
113644 MO9807DSTSET01.000. Drift Scale Test (DST) Temperature, Power, Current, 
Voltage Data for November 7, 1997 through May 31, 1998. Submittal date: 
07/09/1998. 
113662 MO9810DSTSET02.000. Drift Scale Test (DST) Temperature, Power, Current, 
Voltage Data for June 1 through August 31, 1998. Submittal date: 10/09/1998. 
113673 MO9906DSTSET03.000. Drift Scale Test (DST) Temperature, Power, Current, and 
Voltage Data for September 1, 1998 through May 31, 1999. Submittal date: 
06/08/1999.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 8-19 September 2002 
153841 SN0001F3912298.014. Measurements of Displacement Data for the Drift Scale Test 
(with Results from 6/1/1999 through 10/31/1999). Submittal date: 01/18/2000. 
158372 SN0001F3912298.015. Measurements of Strain Data for the Drift Scale Test (with 
Results from 6/1/1999 through 10/31/1999). Submittal date: 01/18/2000. 
153842 SN0001F3912298.016. Measurements of Displacement Data for the Drift Scale Test 
Corrected for Thermal Expansion (with Results from 6/1/1999 through 10/31/1999). 
Submittal date: 01/18/2000. 
158373 SN0001F3912298.017. Measurements of Strain Data for the Drift Scale Test 
Corrected for Thermal Expansion (with Results from 6/1/1999 through 10/31/1999). 
Submittal date: 01/18/2000. 
158374 SN0007F3912298.018. Measurements of Displacement Data for the Drift Scale Test 
(with Results from 11/1/1999 through 5/31/2000). Submittal date: 07/17/2000. 
158387 SN0007F3912298.019. Measurements of Strain Data for the Drift Scale Test (with 
Results from 11/1/1999 through 5/31/2000). Submittal date: 07/17/2000. 
158388 SN0007F3912298.020. Measurements of Displacement Data for the Drift Scale Test 
Corrected for Thermal Expansion (with Results from 11/1/1999 through 5/31/2000). 
Submittal date: 07/17/2000. 
158391 SN0007F3912298.021. Measurements of Strain Data for the Drift Scale Test 
Corrected for Thermal Expansion (with Results from 11/1/1999 through 5/31/2000). 
Submittal date: 07/17/2000. 
158392 SN0011F3912298.022. Plate-Loading Measured Displacement and Test Pressure 
Data (with Results from 10/16/2000 through 10/17/2000). Submittal date: 
11/30/2000. 
158399 SN0011F3912298.023. Plate-Loading Rock Mass Modulus Data (with Results from 
10/16/2000 through 10/17/2000). Submittal date: 11/30/2000. 
158400 SN0101F3912298.024. Measurements of Displacement Data for the Drift Scale Test 
(with Results from 6/1/2000 through 11/30/2000). Submittal date: 01/18/2001. 
158401 SN0101F3912298.025. Measurements of Strain Data for the Drift Scale Test (with 
Results from 6/1/2000 through 11/30/2000). Submittal date: 01/18/2001. 
158402 SN0101F3912298.026. Measurements of Displacement Data for the Drift Scale Test 
Corrected for Thermal Expansion (with Results from 6/1/2000 through 11/30/2000). 
Submittal date: 01/18/2001.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 8-20 September 2002 
158407 SN0101F3912298.027. Measurements of Strain Data for the Drift Scale Test 
Corrected for Thermal Expansion (with Results from 6/1/2000 through 11/30/2000). 
Submittal date: 01/18/2001. 
158408 SN0107F3912298.029. Measurements of Displacement Data for the Drift Scale Test 
(with Results from 12/1/2000 through 5/31/2001). Submittal date: 07/09/2001. 
158409 SN0107F3912298.030. Measurements of Strain Data for the Drift Scale Test (with 
Results from 12/1/2000 through 5/31/2001). Submittal date: 07/09/2001. 
158413 SN0107F3912298.031. Measurements of Displacement Data for the Drift Scale Test 
Corrected for Thermal Expansion (with Results from 12/1/2000 through 5/31/2001). 
Submittal date: 07/09/2001. 
158414 SN0107F3912298.032. Measurements of Strain Data for the Drift Scale Test 
Corrected for Thermal Expansion (with Results from 12/1/2000 through 5/31/2001). 
Submittal date: 07/09/2001. 
159133 SN0203F3903102.001. Drift Scale Test Water Sampling (with Results from 
4/17/2001 through 1/14/2002). Submittal date: 03/29/2002. 
158361 SN0203F3912298.033. Measurements of Displacement Data for the Drift Scale Test 
(with Results from 6/1/2001 through 1/14/2002). Submittal date: 03/26/2002. 
158362 SN0203F3912298.034. Measurements of Strain Data for the Drift Scale Test (with 
Results from 6/1/2001 through 1/14/2002). Submittal date: 03/26/2002. 
158363 SN0203F3912298.035. Measurements of Displacement Data for the Drift Scale Test 
Corrected for Thermal Expansion (with Results from 6/1/2001 through 1/14/2002). 
Submittal date: 03/26/2002. 
158364 SN0203F3912298.036. Measurements of Strain Data for the Drift Scale Test 
Corrected for Thermal Expansion (with Results from 6/1/2001 through 1/14/2002). 
Submittal date: 03/26/2002. 
158322 SN0203L2210196.007. Thermal Expansion and Thermal Conductivity of Test 
Specimens from the Drift Scale Test Area of the Exploratory Studies Facility at 
Yucca Mountain, Nevada. VA Supporting Data. Submittal date: 03/06/2002. 
158314 SNF32020196001.010. Rock Mass Quality Data for the Thermal Testing Facility 
Alcove (Alcove #5) Stations 00+05 to 00+60 Meters. Submittal date: 09/24/1996. 
158434 SNF32020196001.015. Rock Mass Quality Data for the Thermal Testing Facility 
Alcove (Alcove #5) Stations 00+60 to 01+35 Meters. Submittal date: 03/10/1997.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 8-21 September 2002 
109620 SNF32070996001.005. Rock Mass Quality Data for the ESF South Ramp Stations 
64+25 Meters to 66+95 Meters. Submittal date: 01/22/1997. 
158315 SNF35110695001.001. Single Heater Test: As-Built Gage Layouts (Thermocouples, 
Thermistors, MPBX's). Submittal date: 09/25/1996. 
113812 SNF35110695001.008. Evaluation and Comparative Analysis of Single Heater Test, 
Thermal and Thermomechanical Data: First Quarter FY98 Results (8/26/96 through 
11/30/97). Submittal date: 01/06/1998. 
113819 SNF35110695001.009. Thermal and Thermomechanical Data for the Single Heater 
Test Final Report. Submittal date: 08/24/1998. 
158300 SNF35110695001.010. Goodman Jack Measurements in the Single Heater Test 
Block. Submittal date: 05/25/1999. 
159130 SNF38040197001.001. Heated Drift Test: SNL As-Built Gauge Table 
(Thermomechanical Gauges Only). Submittal date: 01/06/1998. 
159114 SNF39012298002.002. Measurements of Displacement Data for the Drift Scale Test 
(with Results from 11/1/1997 through 5/31/1998). Submittal date: 07/09/1998. 
158417 SNF39012298002.003. Measurements of Strain Data for the Drift Scale Test (with 
Results from 11/9/1997 through 5/31/1998). Submittal date: 09/24/1998. 
153837 SNF39012298002.004. Measurements of Displacement Data for the Drift Scale Test 
Corrected for Thermal Expansion (Results from 11/9/1997 through 5/31/1998). 
Submittal date: 09/24/1998. 
158418 SNF39012298002.005. Measurements of Strain Data for the Drift Scale Test 
Corrected for Thermal Expansion (Results from 11/9/1997 through 5/31/1998). 
Submittal date: 09/24/1998. 
158419 SNF39012298002.006. Measurements of Displacement Data for the Drift Scale Test 
(with Results from 6/1/1998 through 8/31/1998). Submittal date: 10/08/1998. 
158365 SNF39012298002.007. Measurements of Strain Data for the Drift Scale Test (with 
Results from 6/1/1998 through 8/31/1998). Submittal date: 10/08/1998. 
153839 SNF39012298002.008. Measurements of Displacement Data for the Drift Scale Test 
Corrected for Thermal Expansion (Results from 6/1/1998 through 8/31/1998). 
Submittal date: 10/08/1998. 
158366 SNF39012298002.009. Measurements of Strain Data for the Drift Scale Test 
Corrected for Thermal Expansion (Results from 6/1/1998 through 8/31/1998). 
Submittal date: 10/08/1998.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 8-22 September 2002 
158367 SNF39012298002.010. Measurements of Displacement Data for the Drift Scale Test 
(with Results from 9/1/1998 through 5/31/1999). Submittal date: 06/28/1999. 
158368 SNF39012298002.011. Measurements of Strain Data for the Drift Scale Test (with 
Results from 9/1/1998 through 5/31/1999). Submittal date: 06/28/1999. 
153840 SNF39012298002.012. Measurements of Displacement Data for the Drift Scale Test 
Corrected for Thermal Expansion (with Results from 9/1/1998 through 5/31/1999). 
Submittal date: 06/28/1999. 
158369 SNF39012298002.013. Measurements of Strain Data for the Drift Scale Test 
Corrected for Thermal Expansion (with Results from 9/1/1998 through 5/31/1999). 
Submittal date: 06/28/1999. 
158420 SNL02100196001.001. Unconfined Compression Tests on Specimens from the Drift 
Scale Test Area of the Exploratory Studies Facility at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. 
Submittal date: 05/14/1997. 
109722 SNL22080196001.001. Thermal Properties of Test Specimens from the Single 
Heater Test Area in the Thermal Testing Facility at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. 
Submittal date: 08/15/1996. 
158306 SNL22080196001.002. Unconfined Compression Tests on Specimens from the 
Single Heater Test Area in the Thermal Testing Facility at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. 
Submittal date: 08/22/1996. 
119042 SNL22080196001.003. Posttest Laboratory Thermal and Mechanical 
Characterization for Single Heater Test (SHT) Block. Submittal date: 08/26/1998. 
158213 SNL22100196001.006. Laboratory Measurements of Thermal Conductivity as a 
Function of Saturation State for Welded and Nonwelded Tuff Specimens. Submittal 
date: 06/08/1998. 
158370 SNL23030598001.001. Unconfined Compression Tests on Cast-in-Place Concrete 
Specimens from the Drift Scale Test in the ESP (Exploratory Studies Facility) at 
Yucca Mountain, Nevada. Submittal date: 03/10/1998. 
158422 SNL23030598001.003. Creep Testing of Cast-in-Place Concrete. Submittal date: 
10/09/1998. 
159115 UN0106SPA013GD.003. Drift Scale Thermal Test (DST) REKA Probe Acquired 
Data for Thermal Conductivity and Diffusivity for the Period 05/01/1998 to 
04/30/2001 (Heated Measurements for Boreholes 151, 152, and 153). Submittal date: 
06/13/2001.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 8-23 September 2002 
159116 UN0106SPA013GD.004. Drift Scale Thermal Test (DST) REKA Probe Developed 
Data for Thermal Conductivity and Diffusivity for the Period 05/01/1998 to 
04/30/2001 (Heated Measurements for Boreholes 151, 152, and 153). Submittal date: 
06/28/2001. 
159117 UN0109SPA013GD.005. Drift Scale Test (DST) Rapid Evaluation of K and Alpha 
(REKA) Probe Acquired Data for Thermal Conductivity and Diffusivity for the 
Period 05/01/2001 to 08/31/2001 (Heated Measurements for Boreholes 151, 152, and 
153). Submittal date: 09/28/2001. 
159118 UN0112SPA013GD.006. DST REKA Probe Acquired Data for Thermal 
Conductivity and Diffusivity for the Period 09/01/2001 to 12/31/2001 (Heated 
Measurements for Boreholes 151, 152, and 153). Submittal date: 12/31/2001. 
159119 UN0201SPA013GD.007. DST REKA Probe Developed Data for Thermal 
Conductivity and Diffusivity for the Period 05/01/2001 to 12/31/2001 (Heated 
Measurements for Boreholes 151 and 152). Submittal date: 01/07/2002. 
8.4 OUTPUT DATA, LISTED BY DATA TRACKING NUMBER 
LB0208ACEMDSTH.001. Acoustic Emission for the Heating Phase of the DST. Submittal date: 
9/18/2002. 
LB0208AIRKDSTH.001. Air Permeability Data for the Heating Phase of the DST. Submittal 
date: 9/18/2002. 
LB0208AIRKSHTC.001. Air Permeability Data for the Heating and Cooling Phases of the SHT. 
Submittal date: 9/18/2002. 
LB0208GPRDSTHP.001. GPR for the Heating Phase of the DST. Submittal date: 9/18/2002. 
LB0208GPRSHTCP.001. GPR for the Heating and Cooling Phases of the SHT. Submittal date: 
9/18/2002. 
LB0208H2ODSTHP.001. Passive Hydrological Data for the Heating Phase of the DST. 
Submittal date: 9/18/2002. 
LB0208ISODSTHP.001. Isotope Data and CO2 Analysis for the Heating Phase of the DST. 
Submittal date: 9/18/2002. 
LL020709923142.023. Aqueous Geochemistry of Borehole Waters Collected in the Heating 
Phase of the DST. Submittal date: 9/18/2002. 
LL020710523142.025. Temperatures, Heater Powers, and Rock Displacements of the Large 
Block Test. Submittal date: 9/18/2002. 
LL020801723142.028. Electrical Resistance Tomographs of the Drift Scale Test, November 
1997 through December 2001. Submittal date: 9/18/2002.

Thermal Testing Measurements Report U0220 
ANL-NBS-HS-000041 REV 00 8-24 September 2002 
LL020801823142.029. Electrical Resistance Tomographs of the Single Heater Test, August 
1996 through December 1997. Submittal date: 9/18/2002. 
MO0208RESTRDST.002. Restructured Drift Scale Test (DST) Heating Phase Power and 
Temperature Data. Submittal date: 9/18/2002. 
MO0208RESTRSHT.002. Restructured Single Heater Test (SHT) Heating Phase Power and 
Temperature Data. Submittal date: 9/18/2002. 
SN0207F3912298.037. Summary of Smoothed Measurements of Displacement Data for the 
Heating Phase of the Drift Scale Test (with Results From 12/3/1997 through 1/14/2002). 
Submittal date: 9/18/2002. 
SN0208F3511695.011. Summary of Rock Displacement Data from the Single Heater Test (with 
Results from 8/26/1996 through 1/31/1998). Submittal date: 9/18/2002. 
SN0208F3903102.002. Summary of Thermal Test Water Samples and Field Measurements 
through 1/14/2002. Submittal date: 9/18/2002. 
SN0208F3903102.003. Field Measurements and Fluoride Content from HF (Hydrogen-Fluoride) 
Tests. Submittal date: 9/18/2002. 
SN0208F3912298.038. Summary of Smoothed Measurements of Strain Data for the Heating 
Phase of the Drift Scale Test (with Results from 12/3/1997 through 1/14/2002). Submittal date: 
9/18/2002. 
SN0208F3912298.039. Rock Mass Thermal Expansion Coefficients Determined from the Drift 
Scale Test Heating Phase MPBX Measurements. Submittal date: 9/18/2002.