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 2014i Table of Contents

1 Executive Summary

................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 1

2 Scope

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 1

3 Inspection Team, Observers, and Participants

................................ ................................ ......... 3

4 Inspection Schedule

................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 4

4.1 Moni toring 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

................................ ................................ ...................... 32ii

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

................................ .............. 221

1.0 Executive Summary
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) c onducted 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 adequat ely 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 docum ents 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 para meter 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), confi rmed 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 paramet er monitoring program at WIPP. Inspection activities included an examination of monitoring and sampling equipment both on an d 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 I nspection Team, Observers, and Participants

The i nspection 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 D epartment, Hazardous Waste Di vision4

David Squires Engineering and Technical Services NWP

Kris Kuhlman Sandia PA Team Member

- Hydrology SNL

John VandeKraats 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 mon itoring 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, w ith an opening meeting at DOE’s Skee n

- Whitlock Building in Carlsbad, New Mexico. S ite staff presented changes to the monitoring programs that occurred since the previous inspection. T he last half of the morning EPA i nspectors interviewed Delaware Basin s ta ff. In the afternoon the EPA i nspectors visited the Carlsbad Area Environmental Monitoring and Research Center.

The morning of October 23 EPA i nspectors were escorted down into the repository in o rder to review and observe monitored parameters related to waste pa cka g es , MgO emplacement, and geomechanical activities. During the afternoon EPA inspectors remained at the WIPP site and continued with interviews and inspections related to waste ha ndling and operations, geomechanical database capabilities and managment and database, and air monitoring

.

T he morning of October 24th EPA i nspectors traveled to the WIP P site to review activities related to the subsidence and hydrogeologic monitored parameters and see the WIPP core storag e facility and view cores stored there. In the afternoon the EPA i nspectors returned to the Skeen

- Whitlock Building in Carlsbad to review and query the WIPP Waste Data System database . The inspection closeout meeti ng was held on October 24, 2013, at the Sk een

- 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. The se 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 monitorin g 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 annua lly 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 Geotech nical Analysis Report for July 2011

– June 2012 Vol 2. Data are collected as deemed necessary by the Geotechnical Engineer or Geot echnical 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 Deformatio n

o no obs ervable 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 Docu ments related to this program. Procedures used to measures these parameters are also given in the same table. As indicated in Table 3 six procedures h ave been modified since th e 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 t o c hecker)

Installing Multiposition Borehole Rod Extensometers WP 07

- EU1305 Rev 2 No modification since last i nspection

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 1/10 th 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

Editorial8 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 01/05/20129

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 t he WIPP mine for observations. Inspectors observed fracture measurements bei ng collected in borehole OH1018 located in Panel 6 Room 1. This borehole is drilled 3

- inches in diameter and 20

- fee t deep into the back of the room. Borehole fractures are measured using procedure Geologic and F racture Mapping of Facility Horizon Drifts , Rev 5, WP07EU1001. The i nspectors noted during the measurements the Geotechnical Engineers were f ollowing procedure WP07EU1001. Figure 1 is a photograph of a borehole where the fr acture measurement took place. Th ese measurements are then entered into the database following procedure given in Manually Acquired Geomechanical Instrument Dat a (WP 07

- EU1301 Rev 8, EPA Inspection ID: KME

- M2013

- GT03)

.

Figure 1

. Taking Fracture Measurement at Observation Hole OH101 8
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 demonstra ted data processing of frac ture 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 fracture s 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 i nspectors to confirm fracture data was recorded per procedure EU1301 and sub mitted to the Geotechnical data base.10

The EPA inspec tors asked Mr. Stensrud about procedures and the documentation used to collect and store repository borehole core information. To assure older core sample rec ords are readily available the i nspector specifically requested looking at records for a core dril led 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. C ore coordinates, measurement units, direction (to p/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 i nspector’s review of the pictorial record against the current pro cedure verified th at DOE is adequately monitoring, recording, and archiving core sample information

.

Figure 2

. Pi cture of Core taken from OH572

On October 24 th the EPA team visited the locked shipping container s that store WIPP core samples extracted from the repository

. The EPA i nspector 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, a nd 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). Th e i nspectors 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, a nd spot checked retrieval o f 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 an y concerns or findings for the G eotechnical 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 monitor ed 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 respon sibilities 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 grou ndwater monitoring program . The groundwater chemistry monitoring results and the groundwater particle travel path length, travel time, and average groundwater velocity from the WIP P 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 22 nd opening presentation

, Rick Salness , lead staff of WIPP’s Groundwater Monitoring Program, described ongoing act ivities 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 cha racteristic of the Culebra

 PVC tubing in wells SNL

- 10 and SN

- 18 was blocking the well screen. This tubing was cleared from the wells.

 B rushed 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 Cul ebra /Mag enta 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 ground water 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 at12

three wells screened in the Magen ta 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 f or 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 2/22/201213

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 24 th

, 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 th e steps used to collect w ell water and take samples used to measure basic groundwater constituents (indicator parameters) and test for any radiological and non

radiological contaminants. T he indicator parameters are pH, specific conductance, temperature,

a nd 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 Sa mple Collection and Anion and Cation Analysis (WP 02

- EM1005 an d WP 02

- EM1006, respectively). The two

- step methodology is now retired. EPA’s October 24 th visit was the first time the i nspector 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 i nspector observed calibration of the Orion 93 Versa Star pH and conductivity meter (Figure 4 ) and re viewed the calibration output sheet

. The i nspector deemed groundwat er sample collection, instrument calibration and data r ecording per procedure WP 02

— EM1010 and performed by the environmental field staff w ere 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 and15

Appendices E and F. Culebra groundwater quality components are evaluated annual ly 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 95 th upper tolerance levels for data considered no nparametric (i.e., having neither a normal nor a lognormal distribution with 16

– 95 percent non

- detects) or the 95 th 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 constit uents 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, NO 3 - ).

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 th ose annually measured in the field. The analysis to determine Culebra groundwater flow direction is performed by scientists at Sandia National Laboratories. The EPA i nspector examined Culebra potentiometric head data and resulting travel paths and times gi ven 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 Averag e 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 2010 1 ASER February 2011 2

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 sl ightly 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 t his 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. EP A 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 m orning of October 24, inspectors m et with WWDS personnel, who answered questions

a n d generated a Nucli d e Report, a Materials E mplace m ent Report, several query reports and the M g O safety factor calculations. All electronic records were found to contain required waste
strea m , container and e m plac e m ent infor m ation. The Summary of Waste Emplacement Inventory Report generated the current activity of repository e mplaced waste as of O ctober 24, 2013, and included the current total a cti v ities of the ten EPA

- trac k ed 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 R H wast e to 5.1 million curies. The emplaced waste as of October 27, 2013 , shown in Table 7 is 89,359 cubic m eters 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 a ny 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 Surveill ance 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 occurr ed betwee n September 1, 2011 and August 31, 2012.
During the October 22 nd 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 Insp ection ID : KME

- M2013

- DB10). These are given below:

Current Well Network as of October, 2013

 June 1, 2012 to August 31, 2013: 1
, 312 n ew deep w ells drilled in the Delaware Bas in, Texas and New Mexico

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

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

 There are 35 n ew deep w ells drilled in WIPP ‘Nine

- Township’ area a s of June 1, 2012

 Of the 35 new well s, 10 are within in the WIPP ‘ 1 mil e radius ’

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

The morning of October 22 nd EPA inspectors met with Delaware Basin monitoring staff and vi ewed 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 d rilling rates and permitted wells . The functional components of the database were provided with Delaware Basin personnel running EP A 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 In spection 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

- 201 3 , EPA ID: KME

- M2012

- DB07 ). The map w as compared to Figure 2 in the DOE June

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

- M2012

- DB1 1). T he two maps were i n agreement and corroborate that the map generation proce ss is reproducible and traceable.19

For t his year ’ s inspection EPA i nspectors focused on seismic event s 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 Delawa re Basin Annual Monitoring Report. The EPA i nspector asked
to quer y 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 t he 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 I nspection ID: KME

- M2013

– DB06). The query table and map results corroborate the reporte d values given in and demonstrate the functionality of the Delaware Basin Monitoring program.

Figure 5 . Delaware Basin Seismic Activities Recorded Within the WIPP Vicinity20

EPA i nspectors reviewed th e information provided in the Delaware Basin Annual Monitoring Report (DOE

- WIPP

- 13

- 2308, EPA Inspection ID: KME

- M2012

- DB03). E PA 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 10/22/201321

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 a nnually during pre

- closure operations. The results of this program are reported annually. The most recent survey results are provided in WIPP Subsidence Monument Leveling Surve y 201 2 , DOE/WIPP 12

- 3497

. The report shows that survey loop vertical closures an d 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 rep orted 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 t he 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 t he 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 s urvey 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 Review ed

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 /201 1 WIPP Panel Closure Plan WP 09

- ES.02
, Rev 2 11/30/2012

WIPP Subsidence Monument Leveling Survey 201 2 DOE/WIPP 12

- 3497 12/ 27 /201 123 Attachments24 

### 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 contin ued 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 under ground. 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 monitor ing 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 inspe ction 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.2526 

### Attachment B
2013 Monitoring Inspection Checklist

Checklist for Geotechnical Monitoring Commitments

– October 201 3

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 q uality 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 result s. 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.

R esults of this program are documented annually in the Geotechnical Analysis Report Volumes 1 and 2 for each reporting p eriod (DOE/WIPP

- 13

- 3501, Vol 1 and DOE/WIPP

- 13

- 3501, Vol 2; respectively). The inspector verified that the geomechanical parameters con tinued to be appropriately monitored by DOE. Sat27

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 demonst rate 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;

Wa ste Isolation Pilot Plant Annual Site Environmental Report for 2011 Report (DOE/WIPP

- 12

- 3489)
Section 6.2.5, Figure s 6.11 and Figure 6.1 2

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 201 3 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 Sat28

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 annu al groundwater elevations for wells completed in the Culebra and used data f rom 47 of these well s 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 provi ded in Annual Change Repor

t 2009/2010, Tab le 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 201 2 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 Repor t

- ( EPA Inspection ID: KME

M2012

- WACT 02 ) verifies that these parameters are updated and reported annually. S at

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 Sat29

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

re quirements for these activities. Quality assurance requirements are documented in S ection 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 encounte r data are reported annually in the Delaware Basin Monitoring Annual Repor t, September 2012

, DOE/WIPP

- 12

- 2308 in Sections 2.5 and 2.6.

WIPP staff discussed changes during the past year. D elaware B asin staff reported on brine encounters, drilling rate cal culations, 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 )

. D elaware B asin 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 Monitor ing Annual Report, December 2012

, DOE/WIPP

12

- 2308 Section 6.0 documents that results are reported annually. DOE WIPP 12

- 2308 verifies that these parameters are updated and reported annually. S at30

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 S at31 This Page Intentionally Blank32 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/WIPP33

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 1134

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/WIPP35 (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) KME

M2013

- DB04 ( Inspection query)

Seismic Table ( Inspection query) KME

M2013

- DB05 ( Inspection query)

Seismic Activity (Map) ( Inspection query) KME

M2013

- DB06 ( Inspection query)

DBM

- 55

- 2013.pdf ( Inspection query) KME

M2013

- 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/WIPP3637

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/WIPP38

Monitoring of Waste Activities ID Source

WIPP Waste Data System Program and Data Management Plan WP 08

- NT.01 Rev 2 2 DOE/WIPP

Annual Transuran ic Waste Inventory Report

– 2012 DOE/TRU

- 12

- 3425 DOE/WIPP

Waste Stream Profile Form Review and Approval Program WP 08

- NT.03 Rev 1 4 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 1 2 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