### DOCKET NO: A-98-49

Item: II-B3-97



## Monitoring Inspection Report

INSPECTION No. EPA-WIPP-6.06-20b

OF THE

WASTE ISOLATION PILOT PLANT June 20 to June 22, 2006

U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

Office of Radiation and Indoor Air Center for Federal Regulation 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20460

September 2006**Table of Contents**

**1.0 Executive Summary..............................**

**................................................... ..................................1** 

**2.0 Scope..........................................**

**................................................... .............................................1** 

**3.0 Inspection Team, Observers, and Participants...**

**................................................... .....................2** 

**4.0 Performance of the Inspection ..................**

**................................................... ..............................3** 

**4.1 Monitoring of Geomechanical Parameters ......**

**................................................... ....................3** 

**4.2 Monitoring of Hydrological Parameters .......**

**................................................... .......................4** 

**4.3 Monitoring of Waste Activity Parameters .....**

**................................................... ......................4** 

**4.4 Monitoring of Drilling Related Parameters ...**

**................................................... ......................4** 

**4.5 Monitoring of Subsidence Parameters .........**

**................................................... ........................5** 

**5.0 Summary of Findings............................**

**................................................... ..................................5** 

**Attachments**

**Attachment A Inspection Plan and Checklist**

**Attachment B Documents Reviewed 1** 

1.0 Executive Summary

**The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) con ducted an inspection of the**  **Department of Energy’s (DOE) Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) from June 20 to June 22,**  **2006, as part of our continuing WIPP oversight prog ram. The purpose of this inspection was to**  **verify that DOE continues to adequately monitoring the ten parameters listed in the Compliance**  **Certification Application (CCA), Volume 1, Section 7.0, in particular Table 7-7 (See Table 1,**  **COB-M2006-1). Attachment A contains the checklist and the inspection plan used by the EPA**  **inspector, and Attachment B lists documents reviewe d by the EPA inspector.** 

**The inspection examined the implementation of moni toring for geomechanical,**  **hydrological, waste activity, drilling related, and subsidence parameters. The EPA inspector**  **toured locations where measurements are taken, revi ewed parameter databases, and reviewed**  **documents and procedures directing these monitoring activities.** 

**The inspector found that DOE, through its contract or Washington TRU Solutions (WTS),**  **effectively implemented the monitoring programs at WIPP for all areas. EPA did not have any**  **findings or concerns. The inspector also confirmed that the results of DOE monitoring programs**  **are reported annually.**

2.0 Scope

**The WIPP Compliance Criteria (40 CFR Part 194.42(a )) require DOE to “conduct an**  **analysis of the effects of disposal system paramete rs on the containment of waste in the disposal**  **system.” The results of these analyses were includ ed in the 1996 Compliance Certification**  **Application (CCA), confirmed in the 2004 Compliance Recertification Application (CRA), and**  **were used to develop pre-closure and post-closure m onitoring requirements.** 

**Volume 1, Section 7.0, of the CCA documented DOE’s analysis of monitoring**  **parameters. Table 7-7 of the CCA lists the ten par ameters that DOE determined may affect the**  **disposal system. These parameters are grouped into major categories and listed in Table 1.** 

Table 1 - Monitored Parameters

Geomechanical Parameters

**-** Waste Activity Parameter

**- -Creep closure, -Waste Activity**  **-Extent of deformation, -Initiation of brittle deformation, and**  Subsidence Parameter

**- -Displacement of deformation features. -Subsidenc**  **e measurements**

Hydrological Parameters

**-** Drilling Related Parameters

**- -Culebra groundwater composition and**  **-Drilling rate and -Change in Culebra groundwater flow -The probabi**  **lity of encountering a**

**direction. Castile brine reservoir. 2** 

**EPA accepted these ten monitoring parameters in th e 1998 Certification Decision and** 

**confirmed them in the 2006 Recertification Decision . This inspection was performed under**  **authority of 40 CFR 194.21, which authorizes EPA to verify the continued effectiveness of the**  **parameter monitoring program at WIPP. Inspection a ctivities included an examination of**  **monitoring and sampling equipment both on and off s ite, and in the underground. EPA also**  **reviewed numerous sampling procedures and measureme nt techniques and verified**  **implementation of an effective quality assurance pr ogram, see the extensive document list in** 

**Attachment B.**

3.0 Inspection Team, Observers, and Participants

**The inspection consisted of four EPA staff. Four members of the New Mexico oversite**  **group also observed the inspection, Tom Kline, Robe rt Blohm, John Hascherts, and Dean Foster.** 

Inspection Team Member Position Affiliation

**Chuck Byrum Inspection Leader EPA**

**Barnes Johnson Observer EPA**

**Nick Stone Observer EPA**

**Tom Peake Observer EPA**

**Numerous DOE staff and contractors participated in the inspection; below is a partial list.** 

DOE/Contractor Participates

**Linda Frank-Supka Ed Flynn**

**Joel Siegel Don Harward**

**Sam Dominguez Randy Elmore**

**John VandeKraats Art Chavez**

**Steve Casey Mansour Akbarzadeh**

**Dave Kump Larry Madl**

**Daryl Mercer Dave Hughes**

4.0 Performance of the Inspection

**The inspection began on Tuesday, June 20, 2006, wit h an opening meeting where**  **changes in the parameter monitor programs since the previous inspection were discussed by site**  **staff. The underground, where geomechanical conver gence measurements are taken, was also** **3**

**inspected. On June 21, 2006 the inspection continu ed with interviews and demonstrations of**  **various aspects of each parameter monitoring area. On June 22, 2006 the EPA inspector**  **examined the database(s) used to store Delaware Bas in parameters and the WIPPP Waste**  **Information System (WWIS) waste computer database s ystem. The inspection closeout meeting**  **was held on June 22, 2006.**

**The EPA inspector reviewed three fundamental areas to verify continued implementation**  **of the DOE parameter monitoring program during the pre-closure phase: 1) written plans and**  **procedures, 2) quality assurance procedures and rec ords, and 3) results of the monitoring**  **program in the form of raw data, intermediate repor ts, and final annual reports, if appropriate.**  **The inspection checklist in Attachment A provides d etails of these inspection activities.** 

**The EPA inspector reviewed various activities to ve rify effective procedure**  **implementation. The inspector observed a demonstra tion of the WWIS and reviewed the**  **Delaware Basin Drilling Surveillance Program, Groun dwater Monitoring Program, and the**  **Geomechanical Monitoring Program.**

4.1 Monitoring of Geomechanical Parameters

**DOE committed to measure four geomechanical parameters in the CCA: creep closure, extent of def**  **ormation, initiation of brittle deformation, and displacement**  **of deformation features. WIPP has four programs that**  **supply information for these four parameters: the geomecha**  **nical monitoring program, the geosciences program, the gr**  **ound control program, and the rock mechanics program. T**  **hese programs are documented in the WIPP Geotechnical**  **Engineering Program Plan, WP 07-01 (COB-M2006-D). The**  **results of the geotechnical program are reported in the**  **Geotechnical Analysis Report for July 2004 - June 2 005,**  **DOE/WIPP-0-3177, Volumes 1 and 2 (COB-M2006-A and - A2).** 

**The EPA inspector toured and reviewed underground instrumentation in Panels 3 and 4, the computer dat**  **abase, and**

**field data sheets used to record raw measurement da ta. EPA**  **also examined output convergence, roof-to-floor measurements, check prints to verify implement of t**  **he measurement plan (COB-M2006-S10, -S11, -S12, and -S**  **13). While underground the inspector observed the acquis**  **ition of convergence using the new digital Geokon extensomet**  **er (Figure 1) and load cell measurements.**  **Figure 1 Convergence Measurement 4** 

4.2 Monitoring of Hydrological Parameters

**DOE committed to measure two hydrological paramete rs in the CCA: Culebra**  **groundwater composition and changes in the Culebra groundwater flow direction. Related**  **parameters are measured and documented in the WIPP environmental monitoring program.**  **These programs are documented in the WIPP Groundwat er Monitoring Program Plan, WP 02-1**  **(COB-M2006-C). Results of this program are documen ted in the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant**  **2004 Site Environmental Report, DOE/WIPP 05-2225 (C OB-M2006-O). This document**  **describes the groundwater monitoring program and re ports results for the previous year.** 

**During the 2006 inspection the EPA inspector reque sted information about changes in the**  **program since last year. Joel Siegel noted that th ree new Culebra wells were drilled and 13 wells**  **plugged (COB-M2006-S2). The current well monitor network consist of 41 Culebra, 11**  **Magenta, 4 dual Culebra/Magenta completions, 1 Dewe y Lake, 2 Bell Canyon, and 16 shallow**  **Santa Rosa/Dewey Lake wells.**

4.3 Monitoring of Waste Activity Parameters

**DOE committed to monitor the activity of waste emp laced in the CCA. This parameter is**  **part of the extensive database collected for each c ontainer shipped to WIPP and is stored in the**  **WIPP Waste Information System (WWIS). The WWIS is a software system that screens waste**  **container data and provides reports on the Transura nic (TRU) waste sent to WIPP. The**  **requirements for the WWIS are discussed in the WIPP Waste Information Program and System**  **Data Management Plan, WP 08-NT.01 (COB-M2006-G).**

**WWIS staff demonstrated that the WWIS can receive data and that the WWIS can**  **generate needed reports. CBFO has committed to ann ual waste activity reports. The inspector**  **obtained copies of the Nuclide Report (COB-M2006-S2 1).** 

4.4 Monitoring of Drilling Related Parameters

**DOE committed to measure two drilling related para meters in the CCA: the drilling rate**  **and the probability of encountering a Castile brine reservoir. These parameters are measured as**  **part of the Delaware Basin Drilling Surveillance Pl an, WP 02-PC.02 (COB-M2006-F). This**  **surveillance program measures and records many para meters related to drilling activities around**  **the WIPP site. The results of the surveillance pro gram are documented annually in the Delaware**  **Basin Annual Report, DOE/WIPP 99-2308 (COB-M2006-N)**

**.**

**Inspectors reviewed the drilling surveillance data base, examined drilling rate changes,**  **and permitted and active injection wells while inte rviewing Dave Hughes. Inspectors received**  **oil well scout tickets and maps of recent activity near WIPP (COB-M2006-S16, -S17, -S18, -S19**  **and –S20). 5** 

4.5 Monitoring of Subsidence Parameters

**DOE committed to measure subsidence at the WIPP si te. This parameter is documented**  **as part of the WIPP Underground and Surface Surveyi ng Program, WP 09-ES.01 (COB-M2006-**  **B). DOE performs subsidence surveys at the site an nually during pre-closure operations. The**  **results of this program are reported annually in th e WIPP Subsidence Monument Leveling**  **Survey – 2005, DOE/WIPP 06-2293 (COB-M2006-E).**

**Ben Zimmerly showed the EPA inspector how selected raw field survey data is used to**  **calculate final surface elevations published in the ir annual report.** 

5.0 Summary of finding, observation, concerns, and recommendations.

**Based on program documents, interviews, and field demonstrations during the inspection,**  **EPA concludes that the monitoring program covers th e ten monitor parameters required by**  **EPA’s 1998 Certification Decision. This inspection determined that the monitoring, sample**  **collection, and sample/data analysis procedures wer e complete and appropriate; that staff were**  **adequately trained and implemented the procedures a dequately; and that appropriate quality**  **assurance measures are applied. For these reasons, EPA finds that DOE has maintained adequate**  **parameter monitoring during the past year and has t he procedures and requirements in place to**  **sustain their program into the next year. EPA has no findings or concerns.** **6** 

### Attachment A: Inspection Plan and Checklist
2006 Monitoring Parameter Inspection Plan

Purpose **: Verify that the Department of Energy (DOE) is appro**  **priately monitoring the parameters required by EPA’s compliance decisions and approvals. This i**  **nspection is conducted under the authority of 40 CFR 194, Section 21.** 

Scope: **Inspection activities will include an examination o f monitoring and sampling equipment both on**  **and off site, and in the underground. A review of sampling procedures and measurement**  **techniques may be conducted. Quality assurance pro cedures and documentation for each of** 

**these activities will also be reviewed.**

Location **: This inspection will be held at the WIPP facility l**  **ocation twenty-six miles south east of Carlsbad, New Mexico and the surrounding vicinity as needed.** 

Duration **: The EPA expects to complete its inspection in two d**  **ays. Each day will begin with an opening meeting at 8:00 a.m. and end at 5:00 p.m. with a cl**  **oseout session.**

Expected Date **: Week of June 19, 2006.**

Documents Required for Review:

**The documents should include revised version of all documents and procedures submitted during**  **past inspections (such as current versions of Delaw are Basin Monitoring Annual Report**  **DOE/WTS 99-2308 Revision 5, Sept. 2004; and, Hydrol ogical Monitoring: WIPP Groundwater**  **Monitoring Program Plan WP 02-1 Revision 6, 3/6/03) and any new materials related to the site**  **parameter monitoring program. If there are any que stions as to the documents required, please**  **contact Chuck Byrum at 214-665-7555.**Monitoring Commitments – June 2006 Geomechanical Parameters

# Question Comment (Objective Evidence) Result

**1 Does DOE demonstrate that they have**  **implemented plans/programs/procedures to**

**measure -**

**a) Creep Closure;**

**b) Extent of Deformation;**

**c) Initiation of Brittle Deformation and**

**d) Displacement of Deformation Features**

**during the pre-closure phase of operations as specified in the CCA part of the geomechanical**  **monitoring system?**

**(CCA, Volume 1, Table 7-7; App MON, Table MON-1) 40 CFR 194.42 (c) and (e)**  **WIPP Geotechnical Engineering Program Plan, (WP 07-01: COB-M2006-D),**  **documents plans to measure, report, and the QA requirements related to these activities.** 

**Section 3.0 of WP 07-01 documents the geomechanical monitoring program and** 

**records the activities associated with this program. Section 4.0 of WP 07-01**  **documents the quality assurance requirements for these activities.** 

**During this inspection Ricky Whitely and Sam Dominguez demonstrated the adequacy**  **of the program and that the program produces satisfactory results (COB-M2006-**  **S10, -S11, -S12, -S13a and -S13b). They showed samples remote measurement,**  **sample plots, and Ricky Whitely preformed underground measurements of convergence**  **and rock bolt load cells (COB-M2006-S10 and -S11). WTS continues, as last year, to**  **enhance roof control to mitigate the impact of stringers anhydrite stringers in Panels 3** 

**and 4.**

**Results of this program are documented annually in the Geotechnical Analysis Report**  **for each reporting period (DOE/WIPP 06- 3177: COB-M2006-A and -A2).** 

**The inspector toured and reviewed the computer system and databases used to**  **collect and process recorded data. SAT** 

**2 Does DOE demonstrate that they have**  **implemented an effective quality assurance program for item 1 above? 40 CFR 194.22**  **During this inspection the EPA inspector evaluated the quality assurance program and**  **found it to be adequate. SAT** 

**3 Does DOE demonstrate that the results of the**  **geotechnical investigations are reported annually? (CCA, App. MON, Page MON-10)**  **WP 07-01, Section 3.2 requires that analysis be performed annually and results are**  **published in the geotechnical analysis report (DOE/WIPP 06-3177).**  **SAT**

SAT = Satisfactory USAT = UnsatisfactoryMonitoring Commitments – June 2006 Hydrological Parameters

# Question Comment (Objective Evidence) Result

**1 Does DOE demonstrate that they have implemented plans/programs/procedures to** 

**measure -**

**a) Culebra Groundwater Composition;**

**b) Change in Culebra Groundwater Flow**

**Direction**

**during the pre-closure phase of operations as specified in the CCA part of WIPP’s**  **groundwater monitoring plan?**

**(CCA, Volume 1, Table 7-7; App MON, Table MON-1) 40 CFR 194.42 (c) and (e)**  **WIPP Groundwater Monitoring Program Plan, WP 02-1(COB-M2006-C) documents plans to**  **measure, document, report, and the QA requirements for these activities. WP 02-1** 

**records the activities associated with this program (Section 4), methods used (Section 5**  **and 6), and reporting requirements (Section 8)**

**. Section 11.0 of WP 02-1 documents quality**  **assurance requirements.**

**Joel Siegel discussed changes to the program over the past year (COB-M2006-S2). Rick**  **Salness explained the new “hand” contouring techniques used to develop maps used to find**  **flow direction in the Culebra (COB-M2006- S14, -S15a, and –S15b)**  **SAT**

**2 Does DOE demonstrate that they have implemented an effective quality assurance**  **program for item 1 above? (CCA, App MON, Page MON-22) 40 CFR 194.22**  **During this inspection the EPA inspector evaluated the quality assurance program and**  **found it to be adequate. SAT** 

**3 Does DOE demonstrate that the results of the groundwater monitoring program are reported**  **annually? (CCA, App. MON, Page MON-22) WP 07-01, Chapter 3.2 requires that analysis**  **be performed annually and results are published in the annual Waste Isolation Pilot**  **Plant Site Environmental Report (DOE/WIPP 05-2225: COB-M2006-O) Chapters 4.3 and** 

**6.0. SAT** 

SAT = Satisfactory USAT = UnsatisfactoryMonitoring Commitments – June 2006 Waste Activity Parameters

# Question Comment (Objective Evidence) Result

**1 Does DOE demonstrate that they have implemented plans/programs/procedures to** 

**measure -**

**a) Waste Activity?**

**(CCA, Volume 1, Table 7-7; App MON, Table MON-1) 40 CFR 194.42 (c) and (e)**  **WIPP Waste Information System Program and Data Management Plan (WP 08-NT.01: COB**  **M2006-G, Section 6.0) describes how the**

**WWIS is used to measure and store waste activity information. WWIS User’s manual** **(Section 9, DOE/CBFO 97-2273: COB M2006-X) documents procedures used to**  **gather, store, and process waste activity information. Table 3 of the Annual Change**  **Report 2004/2005, (DOE/WIPP 05-3317: COB-M2006-Z) updates waste activity**  **annually.**

**WWIS staff demonstrated the use of the WWIS and generated numerous reports**  **(COB-M2006-S21). Such as the Nuclide Report which summaries isotopes emplaced at** 

**WIPP. These activities demonstrate that waste activity is adequately monitored.**  **SAT**

**2 Does DOE demonstrate that they have**  **implemented an effective quality assurance program for item 1? (CCA, App WAP, page**  **C-30) 40 CFR 194.22 During this inspection the EPA inspector**  **evaluated the quality assurance program and found it to be adequate.**  **SAT**

**3 Does DOE demonstrate that the results of the waste activity parameters are reported**  **annually? (CCA Volume, Section 7.2.4 Reporting)**  **WP 08-NT.01 Section 6, page 11 “Regulatory Reporting” documents that results are reported**  **annually. SAT** 

SAT = Satisfactory USAT = UnsatisfactoryMonitoring Commitments – June 2006 Drilling Related Parameters

# Question Comment (Objective Evidence) Result

**1 Does DOE demonstrate that they have implemented plans/programs/procedures to** 

**measure -**

**a) Drilling Rate; and**

**b) Probability of Encountering a Castile Brine**

**Reservoir?**

**(CCA, Volume 1, Table 7-7; App MON, Table MON-1) 40 CFR 194.42 (c) and (e)**  **The Delaware Basin Drilling Surveillance Plan, (WP 02-PC.02: COB-M2006-F),**  **documents the program planned to measure, document, report, and the QA requirements** 

**for these activities. Section 6.0 of WP 02- PC.02 documents quality assurance**  **requirements. The Delaware Basin Drilling Database Upgrade Process (WP 02-EC3001:**  **COB-M2006-R) documents the process used to update databases with information from** 

**various commercial and state sources. Drilling rate and Castile brine probability are**  **updated annually in the Delaware Basin Monitoring Annual Report (DOE/WIPP 99-**  **2308: COB-M2006-N) in Sections 2.5 and**

**2.6.**

**Dave Hughes discussed changes during the past year (COB-M2006-S1). He reported on**  **brine encounters, drilling rate calculations, and provided maps of drilling activities near**  **WIPP (COB-M2006-S16, -S17, -S18, -S19, - S20 and -S24). He demonstrated that DOE is**  **adequately monitoring these parameters. SAT** 

**2 Does DOE demonstrate that they have implemented an effective quality assurance**  **program for item 1 above? (CCA, App DMP, page DMP-9) 40 CFR 194.22**  **During this inspection the EPA inspector evaluated the quality assurance program and**  **found it to be adequate. SAT** 

**3 Does DOE demonstrate that the results of the drilling related parameters are reported**  **annually? (CCA Volume, Section 7.2.4 Reporting; App DMP, page DMP-9)**  **WP 02-PC.02 Section 6.0 documents that results are reported annually. COB-M2006-N**  **verifies that these parameters are updated and reported annually.**  **SAT**

SAT = Satisfactory USAT = UnsatisfactoryMonitoring Commitments – June 2006 Subsidence Measurements

# Question Comment (Objective Evidence) Result

**1 Does DOE demonstrate that they have implemented plans/programs/procedures to** 

**measure -**

**a) Subsidence measurements?**

**(CCA, Volume 1, Table 7-7; App MON, Table MON-1) 40 CFR 194.42 (c) and (e)**  **WIPP Underground and Surface Surveying Program (WP 09-ES.01: COB-M2006-B),**  **documents the program used to measure, document, report, and the QA requirements** 

**for these activities. The WIPP Subsidence Monument Leveling Survey for 2005**  **(DOE/WIPP 06-2293: COB-M2006-E) documents that DOE reports this parameter**  **annually and the results of this program.**

**Ben Zimmerly demonstrated that procedures are adequately implemented when he showed** 

**how the raw field data collected is reduced to useful survey and how annual results are**  **calculated. They demonstrated that subsidence is adequately monitored at the site.**  **SAT**

**2 Does DOE demonstrate that they have implemented an effective quality assurance**  **program for item 1? 40 CFR 194.22 During this inspection the EPA inspector**  **evaluated the quality assurance program and found it to be adequate.**  **SAT**

**3 Does DOE demonstrate that the results of the subsidence measurements are reported**  **annually? (CCA Volume, Section 7.2.4 Reporting)**  **WP 09-ES.01 Section 1.1 documents that results are reported annually**  **SAT**

### Attachment B: Documents Reviewed