Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-qlrfm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-11T16:18:17.106Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Advantages of a Salt/Bentonite Backfill for Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Disposal Rooms

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 February 2011

B.M. Butcher
B.M. Butcher*
Affiliation:
Sandia National Laboratories, PO Box 5800, Albuquerque, NM 87185.
Get access

Abstract

This paper concludes that a 70 wt% salt/30 wt% bentonite mixture is preferable to pure crushed salt as backfill for disposal rooms in the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. The performance of two backfill materials is examined with regard to various selection criteria related to compliance with the transuranic radioactive waste standard 40 CFR 191, Subpart B, such as the need for low liquid permeability after closure, chemical stability, strength, ease of emplacement, and sorption potential for brine and radionuclides. Both salt and salt/bentonite are expected to consolidate to a final state of permeability ≤ 10-18 m2, which is adequate for satisfying government regulations for nuclear repositories. The real advantage of the salt/bentonite backfill depends, therefore, on bentonite’s potential for sorbing brine and radionuclides. Estimates of the impact of these properties on backfill performance are presented.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 333: Symposium V – Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management XVII , 1993 , 911
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1994

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1 Butcher, B.M., Novak, C.F., and Jercinovic, J., The Advantages of a Salt/Bentonite Backfill for Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Disposal Rooms, SAND90-3074 (Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, 1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2 Lappin, A.R., Hunter, R.L., Garber, D.P., and Davies, P.B., eds., Systems Analysis, Long-Term Radionuclide Transport, and Dose Assessments, Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP). Southeastern New Mexico: March 1989, SAND89-0462 (Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, 1989).Google Scholar
3 Pfeifle, T.W.. Consolidation. Permeability, and Strength of Crushed Salt/Bentonite Mixtures With Application to the WIPP, SAND90-7009 (Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, 1991).Google Scholar
4 Stone, C.M., Krieg, R.D., and Beisinger, Z.E., SANCHQ, A Finite Element Computer Program for the Quasistatic. Large Deformation. Inelastic Response of Two-Dimensional Solids, SAND84-2618 (Sandia National Laboratories Report, Albuquerque, NM, 1985).Google Scholar
5 Weatherby, J.R. and Brown, W.T., in A Summary of the Models Used for the Mechanical Response of Disposal Rooms in the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant with Regard to Compliance with 40 CFR 191. Subpart B, Butcher, B.M. and Mendenhall, F.T., SAND92-0427 (Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, 1993), pp. A-199 through A-222.Google Scholar
6 Holcomb, D.J., and Shields, M., Hydrostatic Creep Consolidation of Crushed Salt With Added Water, SAND87-1990 (Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, 1987).Google Scholar
7 Stormont, J.C., Preliminary Seal Design Evaluation for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, SAND87-3083 (Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, 1988).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8 Kappei, G., Geotechnical Investigations on Backfill Materials in the Asse Salt Mine, GSF-T-250 (Gesellschaft für Strahlen-und Umweltforschung München, Brunswick, F.R. Germany, 1987).Google Scholar
9 Pfeifle, T.W. and Brodsky, N.S., Swelling Pressure, Water Uptake, and Permeability of 70/30 Crushed Salt/Bentonite, SAND91-7070 (Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, 1991).Google Scholar
10 Krumhansl, J.L., Observations Regarding the Stability of Bentonite Backfill in a High-Level Waste (HLW) Repository in Rock Salt, SAND83-1293 (Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, 1984).Google Scholar
11 Tyler, L.D., Matalucci, R.V., Molecke, M.A., Munson, D.E., Nowak, E.J., and Stormont, J.C., Summary Report for the WIPP Technology Development Program for Isolation of Radioactive Waste, SAND88-0844 (Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, 1988).Google Scholar
12 Pusch, R. and Karnland, O., Aspects of the Physical State of Smectite-Adsorbed Water. SKB Technical Report 86-25 (Srensk Kärnbränsleförsörjning A.B., Stockholm, Sweden, 1986).Google Scholar
13 Novak, C.F., in The Advantages of a Salt/Bentonite Backfill for Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Disposal Rooms, Butcher, B.M., Novak, C.F., and Jercinovic, M., SAND90-3074 (Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, 1991), pp. B-2 through B-7.Google Scholar