DOCKET NO: A-98-49

Item: II-B3-127

2013 - Monitoring Inspection Report

INSPECTION No. EPA-WIPP-10.13-22b

OF THE

WASTE ISOLATION PILOT PLANT

October 22 – 24, 2013

U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

Office of Radiation and Indoor Air

Center for Waste Management and Federal Regulation

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20460

January 2014
i

Table of Contents

1 Executive Summary................................................................................................................. 1

2 Scope ....................................................................................................................................... 1

3 Inspection Team, Observers, and Participants......................................................................... 3

4 Inspection Schedule................................................................................................................. 4

4.1 Monitoring of Geomechanical Parameters....................................................................... 5

4.2 Monitoring of Hydrological Parameters ........................................................................ 11

4.3 Monitoring of Waste Activity Parameters ..................................................................... 16

4.4 Monitoring of Drilling Related Parameters.................................................................... 18

4.5 Monitoring of Subsidence Parameters ........................................................................... 21

Attachments .................................................................................................................................. 23

Attachment A: Inspection Plan ................................................................................................ 24

Attachment B: 2013 Monitoring Inspection Checklist ............................................................ 26

Attachment C: Documents Reviewed ...................................................................................... 32
ii

Figures

Figure 1. Taking Fracture Measurement at Observation Hole OH1018......................................... 9

Figure 2. Picture of Core taken from OH572 ............................................................................... 10

Figure 3. In-line Flow Sampling Cell Used To Measure the Field Parameter pH, Specific 

Conductance, and Temperature .................................................................................................... 14

Figure 4. Calibration of pH Probe Using Orion 93 VersaStar Meter. .......................................... 14

Figure 5. Delaware Basin Seismic Activities Recorded Within the WIPP Vicinity .................... 19

Figure 6. Surveying Rod on Monument S-24............................................................................... 22

Tables

Table 1 Monitored Parameters....................................................................................................... 2

Table 2 WIPP Inspection Team and Observers............................................................................. 3

Table 3. DOE Documents Reporting Monitored Geomechanical Parameters and Relevant 

Procedures....................................................................................................................................... 6

Table 4. DOE Documents Reporting Monitored Hydrological Parameters and Relevant 

Procedures..................................................................................................................................... 12

Table 5. General Culebra Groundwater Chemistry Constituents Measured................................ 15

Table 6. Estimated Culebra Travel Times, Travel Distance, and Average Groundwater Velocity 

Reported in the ASER for 2010 and 2011. ................................................................................... 16

Table 7. Summary Totals WDS Nuclide Report through October 24, 2013 ................................ 17

Table 8 Delaware Basin Documents Reviewed........................................................................... 20

Table 9. WIPP Subsidence Procedures and Documents Reviewed.............................................. 22
1

1.0 Executive Summary

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) conducted an inspection of the Department of 

Energy’s (DOE) Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) from October 22 to October 24, 2013 as part 

of EPA’s continuing WIPP oversight program. The purpose of this inspection was to verify that 

DOE continues to adequately monitor ten parameters listed in the Compliance Certification 

Application (CCA), Volume 1, Section 7.0, in particular Table 7-7. Attachments A and B 

contains the inspection plan and the checklist used by the EPA inspectors, and Attachment C lists 

documents reviewed by the EPA.

The inspection examined the implementation of monitoring for geomechanical, hydrological, 

waste activity, drilling related, and subsidence parameters. The EPA inspectors toured locations 

where measurements are taken, reviewed parameter databases, and reviewed documents and 

procedures directing these monitoring activities.

The Agency found that DOE continues to effectively implement the monitoring programs at 

WIPP for all areas reviewed. EPA did not identify any findings or concerns during this 

inspection. The inspectors also confirmed that the results of DOE monitoring programs are 

reported annually. 

2.0 Scope

The EPA WIPP Compliance Criteria (40 CFR Part 194.42(a)) require DOE to “conduct an 

analysis of the effects of disposal system parameters on the containment of waste in the disposal 

system.” The results of these analyses were included in the 1996 Compliance Certification 

Application (CCA), confirmed in the most recent Compliance Recertification Application 

(CRA), and were used to develop pre-closure and post-closure monitoring 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 parameters that DOE determined may affect the disposal system. 

These parameters are grouped into major categories and listed in Table 1. EPA accepted these 

ten monitoring parameters in the 1998 Certification Decision and confirmed them in the 2010 

Recertification Decision. 
2

Table 1 Monitored Parameters

Parameter 

Categories

Parameter

Geomechanical Creep closure 

Extent of deformation

Initiation of brittle deformation

Displacement of deformation features

Hydrological

Culebra groundwater composition

Change in Culebra groundwater flow direction

Subsidence Subsidence measurements

Drilling Related

Drilling rate

Probability of encountering a Castile brine reservoir

Waste Activity Waste Activity

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 

activities included an examination of monitoring and sampling equipment both on and off site, 

and in the underground. EPA also reviewed numerous sampling procedures and measurement 

techniques and verified implementation of an effective quality assurance program (see the 

document list in Attachment B of this report). 
3

3.0 Inspection Team, Observers, and Participants

The inspection team consisted of three EPA staff listed in Table 2. Observing the inspection was 

Thomas Kesterson of the State of New Mexico Environment Department.

Table 2 WIPP Inspection Team and Observers 

Inspection Team Member Position and Inspection Focus Affiliation

Nick Stone Inspection Leader EPA – Region 6

Jonathan Walsh Inspector EPA - ORIA

Kathleen Economy Inspector EPA - ORIA

Observer Position Affiliation 

Mansour Akbarzadeh Manager Carlsbad Environmental 

Monitoring and Research Center NWP

Terry Batchelder Waste Operations NWP

John Callicoat Delaware Basin Monitoring Lead URS-Professional 

Solutions

Randy Britain Manager Waste Operations NWP

Rey Carrasco Manager Geotechnical Engineering NWP

Art Chavez Senior Scientist – EPA Compliance Group NWP

Jennifer Hendrickson Manager - Air Monitoring NWP

Jaci Davis Air Monitoring NWP

Larry Madl Senior Scientist – EPA Compliance Group URS-Professional 

Solutions

Rick Salness Manager - Environmental and 

Hydrologic Monitoring NWP

Tom Klein Scientist – EPA Compliance Group URS-Professional 

Solutions

Trais Kliphuis WIPP Group Manager

New Mexico 

Environmental 

Department, 

Hazardous Waste 

Division
4

David Squires Engineering and Technical Services NWP

Kris Kuhlman Sandia PA Team Member - Hydrology SNL

JohnVandeKraats Manager WIPP Mine Operations NWP

Steve Wagner Sandia PA Team Member - FEPs J Hart & Associates/

SNL

Mike Walentine Waste Data Monitoring NWP

Ty Zimmerly Geotechnical Engineering NWP

NWP - Nuclear Waste Partnership

SNL – Sandia National Laboratories 

4.0 Inspection Schedule

EPA inspectors 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 records, and 3) results of the monitoring 

program in the form of raw data, intermediate reports, and final annual reports, if appropriate. 

The inspection checklist in Attachment A provides details of these inspection activities. 

The inspection began on Tuesday morning, October 22, 2013, with an opening meeting at 

DOE’s Skeen-Whitlock Building in Carlsbad, New Mexico. Site staff presented changes to the 

monitoring programs that occurred since the previous inspection. The last half of the morning 

EPA inspectors interviewed Delaware Basin staff. In the afternoon the EPA inspectors visited 

the Carlsbad Area Environmental Monitoring and Research Center. 

The morning of October 23 EPA inspectors were escorted down into the repository in order to 

review and observe monitored parameters related to waste packages, MgO emplacement, and 

geomechanical activities. During the afternoon EPA inspectors remained at the WIPP site and 

continued with interviews and inspections related to waste handling and operations, 

geomechanical database capabilities and managment and database, and air monitoring. 

The morning of October 24th EPA inspectors traveled to the WIPP site to review activities 

related to the subsidence and hydrogeologic monitored parameters and see the WIPP core 

storage facility and view cores stored there. In the afternoon the EPA inspectors returned to the 

Skeen-Whitlock Building in Carlsbad to review and query the WIPP Waste Data System 

database. The inspection closeout meeting was held on October 24, 2013, at the Skeen-Whitlock 

Building.
5

4.1 Monitoring of Geomechanical Parameters

DOE committed to measuring four geomechanical parameters in the CCA: creep closure, extent 

of deformation, initiation of brittle deformation, and displacement of deformation features. These 

parameters are monitored through convergence monitoring, deformation monitoring, fracture 

mapping and stratigraphic and fracture mapping, respectively. WIPP has four programs that 

supply information for these four parameters: the geomechanical monitoring program, the 

geosciences program, the ground control program, and the rock mechanics program. These 

programs are described in WIPP Geotechnical Engineering Program Plan, WP07-1 Revision 7; 

the program plan has not been modified since March 19, 2008. The monitored geomechanical 

parameters are reported annually in two volumes spanning a 12- month period. 

The 2011 – 2012 monitored parameters are documented in Geotechnical Analysis Report for July 

2011 – June 2012 Vol 1, DOE/WIPP-13-3501, Vol. 1 and Geotechnical Analysis Report for July 

2011 – June 2012 Vol 2. Data are collected as deemed necessary by the Geotechnical Engineer 

or Geotechnical Cognizant Individual. Overviews of activities or changes that have occurred 

within the Geotechnical program were presented at the October 22 Opening session (EPA 

Inspection ID: KME-M2013-GT014). These are summarized below: 

 Non-editorial and minor modifications in two of the ten Geotechnical procedures

o WP 07-EU1001, Geologic and Fracture Mapping of Facility Horizon Drifts

o WP 07-EU1303, Geomechanical Instrument Data Processing

 Latest Published Reports 

o Ground Control Annual Plan (DOE/WIPP 02-3212, Rev. 12, May 2013)

o Geotechnical Analysis Report, Volumes 1 & 2 (DOE/WIPP 13-3501, May 2013) 

 Excavation Deformation

o no observable changes

 Mining Effects on Existing Openings 

o Disposal Rooms and RH Boreholes Deformation 

o In line with predicted values 

 Monitoring of Excavation Effects

o Separation at anhydrite stringers in Panel 6 are controlled by roof bolting

o Effects of RH boreholes in Panel 6 are consistent with numerical modeling results 

and Panel 5 observations

o The response to excavation in the SDI area has been predictable, that is, a 

modestly high initial strain followed by a gradual reduction in closure rate over 

time

o Deformation rates are consistent and predictable

Table 3 lists Geotechnical Documents related to this program. Procedures used to measures these 

parameters are also given in the same table. As indicated in Table 3 six procedures have been 

modified since the 2012 inspection.
6

Table 3. DOE Documents Reporting Monitored Geomechanical Parameters and Relevant 

Procedures

Geomechanical Monitored Parameter Documents and Procedures

Document Title DOE Document ID # Last Modification

WIPP Geotechnical Engineering 

Program Plan.

WP 07-1 Rev 7 11/19/2012

Rev 1 Geologic Core Logging WP 07-EU1002

Rev 1

11/27/2012 

Editorial

Geomechanical Instrument Data 

Processing

WP 07-EU1303 Rev 5 05/13/2013 

Some editorial, some 

procedural (related to checker)

Installing Multiposition Borehole 

Rod Extensometers

WP 07-EU1305 Rev 2 No modification since last 

inspection

Installing Wire Convergence Meters WP 07-EU1307 Rev 4 08/13/2013 

Editorial

WIPP Core Storage Handling and 

Distribution

WP 07-EU3504 Rev 4 11/30/2012 

Editorial

Geologic and Fracture Mapping of 

Facility Horizon Drifts

WP 07-EU1001 Rev 5 11/16/2012 

Two revisions since last 

inspection

1. Measurements recorded 

in 1/10th feet from floor 

to back.

2. New step – complete 

BH inspection data 

sheet.
7

Geomechanical Monitored Parameter Documents and Procedures

Manually Acquired Geomechanical 

Instrument Data

WP 07-EU1301 Rev 8 06/25/2013 

Editorial

Installing Convergence Reference 

Points

WP 07-EU1304 Rev 6 None Since Last Inspection

Installing Rock Bolt Load Cells WP 07-EU1306 Rev 4 None Since Last Inspection

Installing Wire Extensometers WP 07-EU1308 Rev 2 None Since Last Inspection

Geomechanical Monitored Parameter Annual Report, July 2010 – June 2011

Document Title DOE Document ID #

Geotechnical Analysis Report for July 2011 – June 

2012 Vol 1, 

DOE/WIPP-13-3501, Vol. 1

Geotechnical Analysis Report for July 2011 – June 

2012 Vol 2

DOE/WIPP-13-3501,, Vol. 2

Procedures Used to Install Geomechanical Monitoring Instruments and

Take Parameter Measurements

Document Title DOE Document 

ID #

Date of Last Modification

Geologic and Fracture Mapping of 

Facility Horizon Drifts

WP 07-EU1001 

Rev 5

11/16/2012 

Two revisions since last inspection

Rev 1 Geologic Core Logging WP 07-EU1002

Rev 1

11/27/2012 

Editorial
8

Geomechanical Monitored Parameter Documents and Procedures

Manually Acquired Geomechanical

Instrument Data

WP 07-EU1301 

Rev 8

06/25/2013 

Editorial

Geomechanical Instrument Data 

Processing

WP 07-EU1303 

Rev 5

05/13/2013 

Some editorial, some procedural

Installing Convergence Reference 

Points

WP 07-EU1304 

Rev 6

None Since Last Inspection

Installing Multiposition Borehole 

Rod Extensometers

WP 07-EU1305 

Rev 2

None Since Last Inspection

Installing Rock Bolt Load Cells WP 07-EU1306 

Rev 4

None Since Last Inspection

Installing Wire Convergence 

Meters

WP 07-EU1307 

Rev 4

08/13/2013 

Editorial

Installing Wire Extensometers WP 07-EU1308 

Rev 2

None Since Last Inspection

WIPP Core Storage Handling and 

Distribution

WP 07-EU3504 

Rev 4

11/30/2012 

Editorial

Sample Data Submittal Sheet

FieldDataSheetBoreholeOH1018_FractureMapsPan

e7Room1Oct2012_May2013

Per Procedure 

WP 07-

EU1001 Rev 7 N/A

Relevant QA for Software

Software Screening and Control WP 16-2 Rev 

11 01/05/2012
9

Changes to these procedures were reviewed by the EPA inspection and are deemed adequate for 

their intended purpose.

Geomechanical data are collected, at a minimum, quarterly but more frequent readings may be

taken. During the morning of October 23, 2013, EPA inspectors went down into the WIPP mine 

for observations. Inspectors observed fracture measurements being collected in borehole 

OH1018 located in Panel 6 Room 1. This borehole is drilled 3-inches in diameter and 20-feet 

deep into the back of the room. Borehole fractures are measured using procedure Geologic and 

Fracture Mapping of Facility Horizon Drifts, Rev 5, WP07EU1001. The inspectors noted during 

the measurements the Geotechnical Engineers were following procedure WP07EU1001. Figure 1 

is a photograph of a borehole where the fracture measurement took place. These measurements 

are then entered into the database following procedure given in Manually Acquired 

Geomechanical Instrument Data (WP 07-EU1301 Rev 8, EPA Inspection ID: KME-M2013-

GT03). 

Figure 1. Taking Fracture Measurement at Observation Hole OH1018 

During the afternoon of October 23, 2013, EPA inspectors interviewed Wayne Stensrud, a 

designated geotechnical cognizant individual (CI) within the geotechnical program. Mr. 

Stenstrud and staff demonstrated data processing of fracture measurements and borehole data 

that had been mapped using procedure Geologic and Fracture Mapping of Facility Horizon 

Drifts WP, Rev 5, 07-EU1001. The measurements are entered on a borehole data entry sheet that 

includes an updated map of the fractures measured in the room. The collected data are entered on 

a field data sheet then put into the database using procedure Manually Acquired Geomechanical 

Instrument Data EU1301. A copy of the Field Data Sheet and fracture maps 

(FieldDataSheetBoreholeOH1018_FractureMapsPane7Room1Oct2012_May2013: EPA 

Inspection ID: KME-M2013- GT04) was given to EPA inspectors to confirm fracture data was 

recorded per procedure EU1301 and submitted to the Geotechnical database. 
10

The EPA inspectors asked Mr. Stensrud about procedures and the documentation used to collect 

and store repository borehole core information. To assure older core sample records are readily 

available the inspector specifically requested looking at records for a core drilled several years 

ago that intersected an anhydrite/halite interface layer and where potential fractures are likely to 

take place. Mr. Stensrud was able to bring up the pictorial record for borehole OH572. Core 

coordinates, measurement units, direction (top/bottom), sample depth, and date drilled were part 

of the picture composition as indicated in Figure 2 per an older version of procedure Geologic 

Core Logging, Rev. 1 WP 07-EU1002. The EPA inspector’s review of the pictorial record 

against the current procedure verified that DOE is adequately monitoring, recording, and 

archiving core sample information. 

Figure 2. Picture of Core taken from OH572

On October 24th the EPA team visited the locked shipping containers that store WIPP core 

samples extracted from the repository. The EPA inspector verified cores are stored, marked and 

handled per procedure WIPP Core Storage Handling and Distribution, WP 07-EU3504 Rev 4.

Cores are located in a secure area, access to the area is limited, and core samples have a Chain of 

Custody sheet as specified in Step 1.1.1 (of WP 07-EU3504). Cores are labeled with indelible 

ink, stored in marked containers with Sample ID, sample collection date, depth and interval 

where samples were taken per Step 1.1.2 (of WP 07-EU3504). The inspectors verified borehole 

cores are stored in locked facility, labeled and marked according per procedure WIPP Core 

Storage Handling and Distribution, WP 07-EU3504. 

In summary, EPA inspectors observed fracture measurements being taken, interviewed cognizant 

individuals related to data processing and storage of this data, visited the core sample storage 

facility, and spot checked retrieval of data processing. Data measurement, retrievablilty of data, 

and storage of core samples was verified during this inspection. Based on these inspection 

observations and activities EPA concluded that the DOE Geotechnical monitoring activities and 

procedures are adequate. EPA inspectors did not identify any concerns or findings for the 

Geotechnical program.
11

4.1 Monitoring of Hydrological Parameters

DOE committed to measure two hydrological parameters in the CCA: 1) Culebra groundwater 

composition, and 2) changes in the Culebra groundwater flow direction. Culebra groundwater 

chemistry monitored parameters are collected by DOE’s Ground Water Monitoring Program

contractors. Culebra flow direction is determined by using annual measurements of Culebra fresh 

water heads as inputs to a calibrated potentiometric map. Programmatic functions and 

responsibilities are outlined in the WIPP Groundwater Monitoring Program Plan, WP 02-1 

Revision 12. Results of this program are published in the annual WIPP Site Environmental 

Report for 2011, September 2012, DOE/WIPP-12-3849 denoted herein as the ASER 2011. The

ASER 2011 describes and presents environmental data which includes the groundwater 

monitoring program. The groundwater chemistry monitoring results and the groundwater particle 

travel path length, travel time, and average groundwater velocity from the WIPP waste handling 

shaft to the WIPP land withdrawal boundary (LWB) are given in the Section 6.2 of the ASER 

2011 report. 

During the October 22nd opening presentation, Rick Salness, lead staff of WIPP’s Groundwater 

Monitoring Program, described ongoing activities within the program that are used to collect 

data reported in ASER (EPA Pres 2013_GW Program, EPA Inspection ID: KME-M2013-

GW14). An update of well networks maintained by the Groundwater Monitoring Program was 

provided. A summary of these activities updates is given below:

 1 replacement well, AEC-7R, drilled in August 2013 (screened in the Culebra and 

replaces AEC-7)

 A 17-day long pump test performed on H-9bR (extracted a total of 968,290 gallons). The

purpose was to test the hydrologic characteristic of the Culebra 

 PVC tubing in wells SNL-10 and SN-18 was blocking the well screen. This tubing was 

cleared from the wells. 

 Brushed and bailed well SNL-1 to removed scale built-up 

The current well network, as of June 30, 2013, is as follows: 

 48 Culebra Monitoring Wells

 12 Magenta Monitoring Wells

 1 Dual Completion Culebra/Magenta Well

 1 Dewey Lake Well

 2 Bell Canyon Wells

 20 Shallow Santa Rosa/Dewey Lake Contact Wells

Basic water quality chemistry measurements continue at the six groundwater monitoring wells 

screened in the Culebra Dolomite, located up- and down-gradient from the repository, and one 

well screened in the Dewey Lake Redbeds. Basic water chemistry testing was also performed at 
12

three wells screened in the Magenta Dolomite—H-2b1, H-4c, and H-9c—and one additional well 

screened in the Culebra Dolomite—well H9bR.

Table 4 lists the current Groundwater Monitoring Program procedures and indicates those 

modified since the last inspection. 

Table 4. DOE Documents Reporting Monitored Hydrological Parameters and Relevant 

Procedures

Procedures Used to Monitor Hydrological Parameters

Document Title DOE Document ID # Last Modification 

WIPP Groundwater 

Monitoring Program Plan

WP 02-1, Rev. 12 11/30/2012

WIPP Environmental 

Monitoring Plan

DOE/WIPP-99-2194

Rev.8 

Jan 2013

Field Parameter 

Measurements and Final 

Sample Collection

WP 02-EM1010

Rev 1

2/25/2013

Administrative Processes for 

Environmental Monitoring 

and Hydrology Programs

WP 02-EM3001 Rev 19 5/08/2013

Pressure Density Survey

WP 02-EM1021 Rev 8 6/6/2011

No Change

Groundwater Level 

Measurement

WP 02-EM1014 Rev 6 No Change

Data Review – Annual 

Culebra Groundwater Report

WP 02-EM1025 Rev 4 2/27/2012

EM&H Field Work and 

Implementation of the Land 

Use Request

WP 02-EM1024 Rev 5 No Change

Water Level Data Handling 

and Reporting

WP 02-EM1026 Rev 4 2/22/2012
13

Integrated Sample Control 

Plan

WP 02-EM.02 Rev 3 4/26/2012

Electric Submersible Pump 

Operation

WP 02-EM1002 Rev 5 2/28/2012

Analysis Report for 

Preparation of 2011 Culebra 

Potentiometric Surface 

Contour Map

ERMS 557633 5/17/2012

October 22 Presentation for

Environmental Monitoring 

and Hydrology 

DOE Presentation 10/22/2013

On October 24th, EPA staff visited well pad WQSP-6A, located downgradient from the WIPP 

site, to observe a demonstration of groundwater field measurements and sample collection per 

DOE procedure Field Parameter Measurements and Final Sample WP 02-EM1010. This 

procedure prescribes the steps used to collect well water and take samples used to measure basic 

groundwater constituents (indicator parameters) and test for any radiological and nonradiological contaminants. The indicator parameters are pH, specific conductance, temperature, 

and specific gravity. The waster samples are collected using a single-step in-line flow-through 

cell instrument, new to the program. Use of the single-step instrument replaces the two-step 

bench chemistry analysis described in procedures Serial and Final Sample Collection and Anion 

and Cation Analysis (WP 02-EM1005 and WP 02-EM1006, respectively). The two-step 

methodology is now retired. EPA’s October 24th visit was the first time the inspector had 

observed the in-line flow through cell sample collection. A picture of the in-line flow through 

cell is given in Figure 3.
14

Figure 3. In-line Flow Sampling Cell Used To Measure the Field Parameter pH, Specific 

Conductance, and Temperature 

The field staff demonstrated the calibration of the pH probe and conductivity probes per Sections 

1 and 2 of procedure WP 02-EM1010. The inspector observed calibration of the Orion 93 

VersaStar pH and conductivity meter (Figure 4) and reviewed the calibration output sheet. The 

inspector deemed groundwater sample collection, instrument calibration and data recording per 

procedure WP 02—EM1010 and performed by the environmental field staff were adequate.

Figure 4. Calibration of pH Probe Using Orion 93 VersaStar Meter. 

EPA inspectors reviewed the Culebra groundwater chemistry results reported in the ASER 2011 

Report (DOE/WIPP-12-3489 and EPA Inspection ID: KME_M2013_CBF01), Sections 6.2.4 and 
15

Appendices E and F. Culebra groundwater quality components are evaluated annually as part of 

the groundwater monitoring programs. Groundwater samples from seven monitoring wells are 

taken and analyzed against the baseline values reported in 2000. Constituents are compared 

against the 95th upper tolerance levels for data considered nonparametric (i.e., having neither a 

normal nor a lognormal distribution with 16 –95 percent non-detects) or the 95th percentile value 

as calculated for baseline values reported in the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant RCRA Background 

Groundwater Quality Baseline Update Report (IT Corporation, 2000). Table 5 lists the 

groundwater indicator parameter constituents monitored. All Culebra general chemistry indicator 

parameters were within the relevant accepted tolerance limits or percentile values. None of the 

constituents of interest exceeded baseline concentrations. 

Table 5. General Culebra Groundwater Chemistry Constituents Measured

Groundwater Constituent Parameters

Common Cations (calcium, magnesium, 

potassium, sodium)

Common Anions (choride, sulfate, nitrate, 

NO3

-

).

Divalent cations

Eh potential

Specific Gravity

pH (Acidity, Alkalinity)

Total Organic Carbon

Dissolved magnesium and potassium

Temperature

Total Suspended Solids

Total Dissolved Solids

Culebra potentiometric head measurements are performed by members of the WIPP 

environmental monitoring program. Changes in Culebra flow direction are modeled by using an 

ensemble average of distributed aquifer parameters and calibrating modeled heads to those 

annually measured in the field. The analysis to determine Culebra groundwater flow direction is 

performed by scientists at Sandia National Laboratories. The EPA inspector examined Culebra 

potentiometric head data and resulting travel paths and times given in Sections 6.2.5 of the 2012 

ASER report and compared this to the 2011 ASER report. Table 6 presents predicted travel time 

values given in the two reports.
16

Table 6. Estimated Culebra Travel Times, Travel Distance, and Average Groundwater 

Velocity Reported in the ASER for 2010 and 2011.

Culebra Travel Times, Travel Distance, and Average Groundwater Velocity

Particle Track Travel Time Originating 

Waste Handling Shaft to LW Boundary

ASER June 20101 ASER February 20112

Estimated Advective Travel Time (years) 6283 5826

Travel Distance (kM) 4.089 4.092

Average Groundwater Travel Velocity 

(m/yr)

0.65 0.70

1 WIPP Site Environmental Report for 2010, Issued September 2011, DOE/WIPP-11-2225

2 WIPP Site Environmental Report for 2011, Issued September 2012, DOE/WIPP-12-3489

Based on seasonal and annual fluctuation of heads used as input to the calibration it is expected 

that potentiometric surfaces will slightly vary from year to year. This is indicated in the slight 

differences between the estimated June 2011 and February 2012 travel time results and velocity. 

These differences are reasonable. The map development process has not changed since last year

and continues to be adequate for this monitoring requirement. 

In summary, EPA inspectors found the groundwater monitoring parameters, groundwater 

chemistry constituents and potentiometric heads and predicted travel times collected by DOE’s 

Groundwater Monitoring Program to be adequate. EPA inspectors did not identify any concerns 

or findings for the groundwater monitoring program.

4.2 Monitoring of Waste Activity Parameters

In the CCA, DOE committed to monitor the total radioactivity of waste emplaced in WIPP. 

Waste activity is collected for each container shipped to WIPP and stored in the WIPP Waste 

Data System (WDS). The WDS is a web-based database which tracks total radioactivity as well 

as other waste components emplaced in WIPP (e.g., ferrous and non-ferrous metals, organic 

materials and MgO as well as radionuclide activity). The overarching requirements for the WDS 

are discussed in the WIPP Waste Data System Program and Data Management Plan, WP 08-

NT.01 Revision 22. Specific requirements and criteria for implementation of the program are 

described in Waste Stream Profile Form Review and Approval Program. 
17

On the morning of October 24, inspectors met with WWDS personnel, who answered questions 

and generated a Nuclide Report, a Materials Emplacement Report, several query reports and the 

MgO safety factor calculations. All electronic records were found to contain required waste 

stream, container and emplacement information. The Summary of Waste Emplacement 

Inventory Report generated the current activity of repository emplaced waste as of October 24, 

2013, and included the current total activities of the ten EPA-tracked radionuclides emplaced in 

the repository. 

The Land Withdrawal Act of 1992 limits the total waste to no more than 6.1 million cubic feet 

and the total activity of the RH waste to 5.1 million curies. The emplaced waste as of October 

27, 2013, shown in Table 7 is 89,359 cubic meters or 3,155,684 cubic feet. The emplaced waste 

is 52% of the maximum allowed. The RH activity is 23,020 curies, which is 0.45% of the 

maximum allowed.

Table 7. Summary Totals WDS Nuclide Report through October 24, 2013

Panel: ALL Room: ALL

Radionuclide Repository CH

Activity (Ci)

Repository RH

Activity (Ci)

Total Repository 

Activity (Ci)

AM-241 Americium 241 2.532E+05 6.083E+02 2.538E+05

CS-137 Cesium 137 1.411E+01 1.389E+04 1.390E+04

PU-238 Plutonium 238 4.794E+05 6.956E+02 4.801E+05

PU-239 Plutonium 239 3.297E+05 3.701E+02 3.301E+05

PU-240 Plutonium 240 8.146E+04 2.719E+02 8.173E+04

PU-242 Plutonium 242 2.683E+01 3.724E-01 2.720E+01

SR-90 Strontium 90 1.580E+01 7.181E+03 7.197E+03

U-233 Uranium 233 6.505E+00 3.842E-01 6.889E+00

U-234 Uranium 234 8.623E+01 1.082E+00 8.731E+01

U-238 Uranium 238 1.741E+01 3.817E-02 1.744E+01

Totals 1.144E+06 2.302E+04 1.167E+06

In summary, EPA inspectors did not identify any concerns or findings in the waste activity.
18

4.3 Monitoring of Drilling Related Parameters

DOE committed to measure two drilling related parameters in the CCA: the drilling rate and the 

probability of encountering a Castile brine reservoir. The overarching protocol for measuring 

these parameters is documented the Delaware Basin Drilling Surveillance Plan, WP 02-PC.02 

Rev 5. Drilling data is collected using procedure Delaware Basin Drilling Database Upgrade 

Process WP 02-EC3002 Rev 6. The surveillance program measures and records many 

parameters related to drilling activities around the WIPP site. The surveillance results 

documented quarterly and combined drilling activity in the annual report Delaware Basin 

Monitoring Annual Report, September 2012, and DOE/WIPP-12-2308. The annual report 

provides drilling data within the basin that occurred between September 1, 2011 and August 31, 

2012.

During the October 22nd opening presentation Jonathan Callicoat, the lead staff member of 

WIPP’s Delaware Basin Surveillance Program, presented ongoing and changes in drilling 

activities within the program (EPA Inspection ID: KME-M2013-DB10). These are given below:

Current Well Network as of October, 2013 

 June 1, 2012 to August 31, 2013: 1,312 new deep wells drilled in the Delaware Basin, Texas 

and New Mexico

 Update to deep borehole drilling rate as of August 31, 2013: 72 boreholes/kilometer 

 Increased from the May 31, 2012 drilling rate of 66.3 boreholes/kilometer 

 There are 35 new deep wells drilled in WIPP ‘Nine-Township’ area as of June 1, 2012

 Of the 35 new wells, 10 are within in the WIPP ‘1 mile radius’

 These deep wells did not report any encounters with Castile Brine

The morning of October 22nd EPA inspectors met with Delaware Basin monitoring staff and 

viewed how the database is updated weekly to track drilling activities in the basin. The procedure 

followed is given in Delaware Basin Drilling Database Upgrade Process WP 02-EC3002 Rev 6 

and used to step through the process to update databases with information from various 

commercial and state sources. Drilling results and brine encounters are presented in the annual 

and quarterly reports.

EPA reviewed the drilling surveillance database and examined changes in drilling rates and 

permitted wells. The functional components of the database were provided with Delaware Basin 

personnel running EPA requested queries. Delaware Basin staff demonstrated how the Delaware 

Basin database maps are produced. A file was produced of all the new Mexican hydrocarbon 

wells drilled in Delaware Basin as of October 7, 2013 (New Mexico Hydrocarbon 201. xlsx; 

EPA Inspection ID: KME-M2013-DB04). WIPP staff created a data file and map of hydrocarbon 

wells within the one mile buffer surrounding the WIPP site (Well Status Table-One Mile Buffer 

10-7-2013, EPA ID: KME-M2012-DB08 and Well Status Map-One Mile Buffer 10-7-2013, EPA 

ID: KME-M2012-DB07). The map was compared to Figure 2 in the DOE June-2013 Quarterly 

Report (Delaware Basin Monitoring Quarterly Report, June 2013, EPA ID: KME-M2012-

DB11). The two maps were in agreement and corroborate that the map generation process is 

reproducible and traceable. 
19

For this year’s inspection EPA inspectors focused on seismic events documented in the database. 

This is a relatively new monitored activity, initiated within the last 2 – 3 years. Seismic activities 

in the Delaware basin region are primarily due to oil and gas exploration and drilling and

reported in Section 2.8 of Delaware Basin Annual Monitoring Report. The EPA inspector asked 

to query the database of the number of Delaware Basin seismic events, plus the year and 

min/max magnitude time, detected in Texas and New Mexico before and after December 31, 

2011. The results of the query are given in Seismic Table 10222013.pdf (KME-M2013–DB05).

A map from this query (Figure 5) is provided in Seismic Activity in the WIPP Vicinity 

10/22/2012 (EPA Inspection ID: KME-M2013–DB06). The query table and map results 

corroborate the reported values given in and demonstrate the functionality of the Delaware Basin 

Monitoring program.

Figure 5. Delaware Basin Seismic Activities Recorded Within the WIPP Vicinity 
20

EPA inspectors reviewed the information provided in the Delaware Basin Annual Monitoring 

Report (DOE-WIPP-13-2308, EPA Inspection ID: KME-M2012-DB03). EPA inspectors did a 

spot check of Texas and New Mexico drilling reports, well database listings and maps of wells 

drilled within the Delaware basin and WIPP vicinity. Based on EPA’s reviews of the Delaware 

Basin database, the map creation process and interviews with the monitoring staff, EPA 

inspectors concluded that DOE adequately tracks Delaware Basin drilling rates and encounters 

with Castile brine within the WIPP vicinity. EPA inspectors did not identify any concerns or 

findings for the Delaware basin drilling and monitoring program adequate.

Table 8: Delaware Basin Documents Reviewed

Document Title DOE Document ID # Last Modification 

Delaware Basin Drilling 

Database Upgrade Process WP 02-EC3002 Rev. 6 12/18/2012

Delaware Basin Surveillance

Plan

WP 02-PC.02 Rev 5 11/27/2012

Delaware Basin Monitoring 

Annual Report DOE WIPP 12-2308 September 2012 

New Mexico Hydrocarbon 

2013.xlsx

( Inspection query) 7/19/2012

Seismic Table ( Inspection query) 7/22/2013

Seismic Activity (Map) ( Inspection query) 7/22/2013

DBM-55-2013.pdf ( Inspection query) 10/31/2013

WIPP Delaware Basin 

Monitoring Quarterly Report 

June 2013

N/A June 2013 

Delaware Basin EPA 

Presentation October 17, 2012

N/A 10/22/2013
21

4.4 Monitoring of Subsidence Parameters

In the CCA, DOE committed to measure ground subsidence at the WIPP site. This parameter is 

measured using procedures documented as part of the WIPP Underground and Surface 

Surveying Program WP 09-ES.01, Rev. 6. DOE performs subsidence surveys at the site annually 

during pre-closure operations. The results of this program are reported annually. The most recent 

survey results are provided in WIPP Subsidence Monument Leveling Survey 2012, DOE/WIPP 

12-3497. The report shows that survey loop vertical closures and accuracies meet the standards 

set by the National Geodetic Survey for Second Order Class II surveys. The report fulfills the 

requirement that the subsidence parameter is measured and reported on a yearly basis.

In the opening presentation, WIPP staff reported that there have been no major changes to the 

subsidence surveying program in the past year, with the exception of new computer hardware 

that will be used to process 2013 data. The relevant procedures, listed in Table 9, have not 

changed. Because of the difficulty of finding replacement memory cards for the Lyca NA3003 

surveying instrument that is currently used, staff anticipate purchasing a new instrument and 

revising these procedures in 2014.

During the last annual inspection in July 2012, EPA inspectors observed the performance of the 

office procedure included in Section 2.0 of Subsidence Survey Data Acquisition Report, WP 09-

ES4001, Rev. 2. The procedure identifies the steps used to process the raw field data in order to 

calculate the final surface evelations. On the morning of October 24, an EPA inspector joined the 

surveying team in the field and observed the surveying of part of Loop 7, which is roughly above 

the footprint of Panel 8. The survey trace is documented in ‘pdf’ file labeled JPW-20131022-

04_Loop_7_map. The procedure 09-ES4001, Rev. 2 was followed correctly as the team surveyed 

from monument K-349 to S-24. EPA inspectors did not identify any concerns or findings.
22

Figure 6. Surveying Rod on Monument S-24

Table 9. WIPP Subsidence Procedures and Documents Reviewed

Document Title DOE Document ID # Last Modification 

WIPP Underground and 

Surface Surveying Program WP 09-ES.01, Rev. 6 11/30/12

Subsidence Survey Data

Acquisition Report WP 09-ES4001, Rev 2 12/14/2011

WIPP Panel Closure 

Plan WP 09-ES.02, Rev 2 11/30/2012

WIPP Subsidence 

Monument Leveling Survey 

2012

DOE/WIPP 12-3497 12/27/2011
23

Attachments
24

Attachment A

Inspection Plan

WIPP Monitoring Inspection Plan 40 CFR 194.42 for the year 2013

Purpose: 

Verify that the Department of Energy (DOE) can demonstrate that the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant 

(WIPP) is monitoring the parameter commitments made in the documentation to support the 

EPA’s certification decision, in particular CCA, Volume 1, Section 7.2, Table 7.7 and Appendix 

MON. This inspection is conducted under the authority of 40 CFR 194, Section 21.

This inspection is part of EPA’s continued oversight to ensure that WIPP can, in fact, monitor 

the performance of significant parameters of the disposal system. 

Scope:

Inspection activities will include an examination of 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 procedures and documentation for each of these 

activities will also be reviewed. 

Focal Areas of This Year’s Inspection:

- What has changed in the monitoring program this past year?

- What documentation and procedures have changes?

- Update the monitoring program and results for the past year.

- Have any monitoring parameters changed (e.g., have the monitored parameters 

changed beyond the expected range of values adopted with the most recent PA 

model)?

Location: This inspection will be held at the WIPP facility location twenty-six miles south east 

of Carlsbad, New Mexico and the surrounding vicinity as needed.

Duration: The EPA expects to complete its inspection in three days. The First day will begin 

with an opening meeting at 8:00 a.m. The Last day will end with a closeout session in the 

afternoon.

Inspection Date: Week of October 21, 2013.

Documents For Review: The latest versions of any documentation and/or procedures related to 

the DOE monitoring program. 
25
26

Attachment B

2013 Monitoring Inspection Checklist

Checklist for Geotechnical Monitoring Commitments– October 2013

Monitoring Commitments Geotechnical Parameters Sat = Satisfactory

# 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 Rev 7, 

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.

WIPP site staff discussed changes to the 

program during the past year (EPA 

Inspection ID: KME-M2013-GT014). 

Staff demonstrated the adequacy of the 

program and that the program produces 

satisfactory results. Geotechnical staff 

demonstrated fracture measurements, 

how they area recorded, core samples, 

core parameters, and core sample 

storage facility. The inspector toured the 

underground and reviewed the databases 

used to collect and process recorded 

data. 

Results of this program are documented 

annually in the Geotechnical Analysis 

Report Volumes 1 and 2 for each 

reporting period (DOE/WIPP-13-3501, 

Vol 1 and DOE/WIPP -13-3501, Vol 2; 

respectively). 

The inspector verified that the 

geomechanical parameters continued to 

be appropriately monitored by DOE.

Sat
27

2 Does DOE demonstrate that they 

have implemented an effective 

qualityassurance program for item 1 

above? 40 CFR 194.22

The overarching QA program has not 

been modified since the 2012 inspection. 

All current components are found to be 

adequate in 2012.

Sat

3 Does DOE demonstrate that the 

results of the geotechnical 

investigations are reported annually? 

(CCA, App. MON, Page MON-10)

WP 07-01 Rev 7, Section 3.2 requires 

that analysis be performed annually and 

results are published in the annual 

geotechnical analysis report 

(DOE/WIPP-13-3501, Vol 1 and 

DOE/WIPP-13-3501, Vol 2. 

Sat

Checklist for Hydrologic Monitoring Commitments – October 2013

Monitoring Commitments Hydrological Parameters

# Question Comment (Objective Evidence) Result

1 Does DOE demonstrate that they have 

implemented 

plans/programs/procedures to measure 

–

a) Culebra Groundwater Composition;

(CCA, Volume 1, Table 7-7; App 

MON, Table MON-1) 40 CFR 194.42 

(c) and (e)

Objective evidence given reviewing 

the following procedures and reports:

Field Parameter Measurements and 

Final Sample WP 02-EM1010)

Sat

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)

Objective evidence given reviewing 

the following procedures and reports 

–

WIPP Groundwater Monitoring 

Program Plan WP 02-1, Rev. 12; 

Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Annual 

Site Environmental Report for 2011 

Report (DOE/WIPP-12-3489)

Section 6.2.5, Figures 6.11 and 

Figure 6.12

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 the 2013 inspection the EPA 

inspector evaluated the quality 

assurance program and found it to be 

adequate.

Sat

3 Does DOE demonstrate that the results Objective evidence given in Waste Sat
28

of the groundwater monitoring program 

are reported annually? (CCA, App. 

MON, Page MON-22)

Isolation Pilot Plant Annual Site 

Environmental Report for 2011 

DOE/WIPP-12-3489, (ASER). The 

document provides annual 

groundwater elevations for wells 

completed in the Culebra and used 

data from 47 of these wells to create 

the Culebra regional and local 

potentiometric maps around the 

WIPP LWB.

Checklist for Waste Activity Monitoring Commitments – October 2013

Monitoring Commitments 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 Data System Program 

and Data Management Plan, WP 08-

NT.01 Revision 22 describes the 

programmatic plan used to monitor 

and store waste activity information. 

The protocol sued to collect, process 

and store the waste activity is 

described in . Yearly reporting of 

waste activity is provided in Annual 

Change Report 2009/2010, Table 3 

(DOE/WTS November 15, 2010).

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 the 2012 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)

Annual Transuranic Waste Inventory 

Report -(EPA Inspection ID: KMEM2012-WACT02) verifies that these 

parameters are updated and reported 

annually.

Sat

Checklist for Drilling Rate Monitoring Commitments – October 2013

Monitoring Commitments Drilling Related Parameters

# Question Comment (Objective Evidence) Result

1 Does DOE demonstrate that they have 

implemented 

The Delaware Basin Drilling 

Surveillance Plan, WP 02-PC.02 Rev 

Sat
29

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)

5, documents the program to 

measure, record, report, and the QA 

requirements for these activities.

Quality assurance requirements are 

documented in Section 7.0 of WP 02-

PC.02 Rev 5. The Delaware Basin 

Drilling Database Upgrade Process

WP 02-EC3002 Rev 5 documents the 

process used to update databases with 

information from various commercial 

and state sources. Drilling rate and 

Castile brine encounter data are 

reported annually in the Delaware 

Basin Monitoring Annual Report, 

September 2012, DOE/WIPP-12-

2308 in Sections 2.5 and 2.6.

WIPP staff discussed changes during 

the past year. Delaware Basin staff 

reported on brine encounters, drilling 

rate calculations, seismic activity, and 

provided maps of drilling activities 

near WIPP). Staff also provided the 

latest listing of the New Mexico well 

databases and one mile buffer zone 

(KME-M2013-DB04, KME-M2013-

DB08, respectively). Delaware Basin

staff demonstrated that DOE is 

adequately monitoring these 

parameters through the monitoring 

program.

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)

Delaware Basin Monitoring Annual 

Report, December 2012, DOE/WIPP12-2308 Section 6.0 documents that 

results are reported annually. DOE 

WIPP 12-2308 verifies that these 

parameters are updated and reported 

annually.

Sat
30

Checklist for Subsidence Monitoring Commitments – October 2013

Monitoring Commitments Subsidence Measurements

# Question Comment (Objective Evidence) Result

Does DOE demonstrate that they have 

implemented 

plans/programs/procedures to measure -

a) Subsidence Measurement? (CCA, 

Volume 1, Table 7-7; App MON, Table 

MON-1) 40 CFR 194.42 (c) and (e)

Demonstration is provided via the 

implementation of the subsidence 

survey program as given in WIPP 

Underground and Surface Surveying 

Program WP 09-ES.01, Rev. 6

Sat

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

Does DOE demonstrate that the results 

of the subsidence measurements are 

reported annually? (CCA Volume, 

Section 7.2.4 Reporting;)

The results of this program are 

reported annually in the WIPP 

Subsidence Monument Leveling 

Survey – 2012, DOE/WIPP 12-3497

Sat
31

This Page Intentionally Blank
32

Attachment C

Documents Reviewed

Monitoring of Geomechanical Parameters ID Source 

Geotechnical Analysis Report for July 2011 – June 2012 

Vol 1, 

DOE/WIPP-13-3501, Vol. 1 DOE/WIPP

Geotechnical Analysis Report for July 2011 – June 2012 

Vol 2

DOE/WIPP-13-3501,, Vol. 2 DOE/WIPP

Geologic and Fracture Mapping of Facility Horizon Drifts WP 07-EU1001 Rev 5 DOE/WIPP

Rev 1 Geologic Core Logging WP 07-EU1002

Rev 1

DOE/WIPP

Manually Acquired Geomechanical Instrument Data WP 07-EU1301 Rev 8 DOE/WIPP

Geomechanical Instrument Data Processing WP 07-EU1303 Rev 5 DOE/WIPP
33

Installing Convergence Reference Points WP 07-EU1304 Rev 6 DOE/WIPP

Installing Multiposition Borehole Rod Extensometers WP 07-EU1305 Rev 2 DOE/WIPP

Installing Rock Bolt Load Cells WP 07-EU1306 Rev 4 DOE/WIPP

Installing Wire Convergence Meters WP 07-EU1307 Rev 4 DOE/WIPP

Installing Wire Extensometers WP 07-EU1308 Rev 2 DOE/WIPP

WIPP Core Storage Handling and Distribution WP 07-EU3504 Rev 4 DOE/WIPP

Sample Data Submittal Sheet

FieldDataSheetBoreholeOH1018_FractureMapsPane7Room1Oct2012_May20

13

Per Procedure 

WP 07-EU1001 Rev 7 DOE/WIPP

Relevant QA for Software

Software Screening and Control WP 16-2 Rev 11
34

Monitoring of Hydrological Parameters ID Source 

WIPP Groundwater Monitoring Program Plan WP 02-1, Rev. 12 DOE/WIPP

Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Environmental Monitoring Plan

DOE/WIPP-99-2194

Rev.8 

DOE/WIPP

Field Parameter Measurements and Final Sample Collection

WP 02-EM1010

Rev 1

DOE/WIPP

Administrative Processes for Environmental Monitoring and Hydrology 

Programs

WP 02-EM3001 Rev 19 DOE/WIPP

Pressure Density Survey WP 02-EM1021 Rev 8 DOE/WIPP

Groundwater Level Measurement WP 02-EM1014 Rev 6 DOE/WIPP

Data Review for the Annual Culebra Groundwater Report WP 02-EM1025 Rev 4 DOE/WIPP

EM&H Field Work and Implementation of the Land Use Request WP 02-EM1024 Rev 5 DOE/WIPP

Water Level Data Handling and Reporting WP 02-EM1026 Rev 4 DOE/WIPP

Integrated Sample Control Plan WP 02-EM.02 Rev 3 DOE/WIPP

Electric Submersible Pump Operation WP 02-EM1002 Rev 5 DOE/WIPP

Analysis Report for Preparation of 2011 Culebra Potentiometric Surface 

Contour Map

ERMS 557633 SNL

October 22 Presentation for Environmental Monitoring and Hydrology 

N/A 

DOE/WIPP
35

(DOE October 22, 2013) 

Monitoring of Delaware Basin Parameters ID Source 

Delaware Basin Surveillance

Plan

WP 02-PC.02 Rev 5

DOE/WIPP

Delaware Basin Drilling Database Upgrade Process

WP 02-EC3002 Rev. 6

DOE/WIPP

Delaware Basin Monitoring Annual Report

DOE WIPP 12-2308

DOE/WIPP

New Mexico Hydrocarbon 2013.xlsx

( Inspection query) KMEM2013-DB04 ( Inspection query)

Seismic Table

( Inspection query) KMEM2013-DB05 ( Inspection query)

Seismic Activity (Map)

( Inspection query) KMEM2013-DB06 ( Inspection query)

DBM-55-2013.pdf

( Inspection query) KMEM2013-DB08( Inspection query)

WIPP Delaware Basin Monitoring Quarterly Report June 2013

NONE

DOE/WIPP

October 22 Delaware Basin EPA Presentation 

N/A 

(DOE October 22, 2013) DOE/WIPP
36
37

Monitoring of Subsidence Parameters ID Source 

WIPP Underground and Surface Surveying Program WP 09-ES.01, Rev. 6 DOE/WIPP

Subsidence Survey Data Acquisition Report

WP 09-ES4001, Rev 2

DOE/WIPP

WIPP Panel Closure Plan WP 09-ES.02, Rev 2 DOE/WIPP

WIPP Subsidence Monument Leveling Survey 2011 DOE/WIPP 12-2293, Rev 2 DOE/WIPP
38

Monitoring of Waste Activities ID Source 

WIPP Waste Data System Program and Data Management Plan WP 08-NT.01 Rev 22 DOE/WIPP

Annual Transuranic Waste Inventory Report – 2012 DOE/TRU-12-3425 DOE/WIPP

Waste Stream Profile Form Review and Approval Program WP 08-NT.03 Rev 14 DOE/WIPP

Waste Data System User's Manual DOE/WIPP-09-3427 Rev 7 DOE/WIPP

Waste Data System Software Verification and Validation Plan WP 08-NT.05 Rev 12 DOE/WIPP

TRU Waste Receipt WP 08-NT3020 Rev 23 DOE/WIPP

Waste Data System Configuration Management and Software Quality 

Assurance Program WP 08-NT.04 Rev 21 DOE/WIPP