TV

Department of EnergyOffice of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management

Yucca Mountain Site Characteriation OfficeP.O. Box 98608

Las Vegas, NV 89193-8608

DEC 2 9 1994

L.-Dale FoustTechnical Project Officer

for Yucca MountainSite Characterization Project

TRW Environmental Safety Systems, Inc.Bank of America Center, Suite P-110101 Convention Center DriveLas Vegas, NV 89109

EVALUATION OF AMENDED RESPONSE TO CORRECTIVE ACTION REQUEST(CAR) YM-94-073 RESULTING FROM YUCCA MOUNTAIN QUALITY ASSURANCEDIVISION (YMQAD) AUDIT YMP-94-01 OF THE CIVILIAN RADIOACTIVEWASTE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM MANAGEMENT AND OPERATING CONTRACTOR(SCPB: N/A)

The YMQAD staff has evaluated the amended response to CARYM-94-073. The response has been determined to be satisfactory.Verification of completion of the corrective action will beperformed after the effective date provided. Any extension tothis date must be requested in writing, with appropriatejustification, prior to the date. Please send a copy ofextension requests to Deborah Sult, YMQAD/QATSS, 101 ConventionCenter Drive, Suite 640, Las Vegas, Nevada 89109.

If you have any questions, please contact either Robert B.Constable at 794-7945 or Richard E. Powe at 794-7749.

Richard E. Spence, DirectorYMQAD:RBC-1528 Yucca Mountain Quality Assurance Division

Enclosure:CAR YM-94-073

cc w/encl:T. A. Wood, HQ (RW-14) FORS*bM D~o~Z'-NRC, Washington, DCS. W. Zimmerman, NWPO, Carson City, NVR. L. Robertson, M&O/TRW, Vienna, VARichard Jiu, M&O/Duke, Las Vegas, NVR. P. Ruth, M&O/TRW, Las Vegas, NVD. G. Horton, OQA (RW-3) NVR. M. Nelson, Jr., YMSCO, NV

cc w/o encl:W. L. Belke, NRC, Las Vegas, NV

YMP-5 D. G. Sult, YMQAD/QATSS, Las Vegas, NV

9501120101 941229PDR WASTEWM-11 PDR

THIS It A RED STAMP

OFFICE OF CMVUIAN 8 CAR NO.: OH94073RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT PAGE: A OF 2

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY _WASHINGTON, D.C.

CORRECTIVE ACTION REQUEST1 Controlling Document 2 Related Report No.

OCRWH. QARD, DOE/RW-0333P, Revision 01 Yle-94-01

3 Responsible Organization 4 Discussed WithMWO J. Pye/S. Bonabien/J. Naaf

6 Requirement:1) QARD DOE/RW-0333P, Revision 0, Section 3.2.1.3 states- "Design inputs

shalt be identified and documented, and their selection reviewed andapproved by those responsible for the design."

Section 3.2.2.F states: "Applicable information derived from experience,(Continued on next page)

6 Adverse Condition:Desig validation vas not performed on the Starter Tunnel and used as input tothe design of the North Ramp Package 2C. It was also determined that presentlythere is not a plan to use design validation data for making real timedesign modifications to the ground support.

Discussion:

10CFR60.141(a), (b), and (d) requires that the design validation activity beperformed as part of the performance confirmation process. It specificallystates that the geotechnical in-situ conditions found should be compared wilththe original design bases and assumptions. Further, the design validationprocess should be a real time activity that will provide the justification anddocumentation for ground support changes as the excavation is advancing.

9 Does a Significant Condition IO Does a stop work condition exist? 3 Response Due Date:Adverse to Quality exist? YesLX No_ Yes__ NoX_; If Yes - Attach copy of SWO 20 Working DaysifYes,CheckOne:0AK)BOC9EDVE tfYes,CheckOne: CIA OB COc From Issuance

11Required Actions: EIl Remedial [X Extent of Deficiency K1] Preclude Recurrence IE] Root Cause Determination12 Recommended Actions:

Complete the design validation for the starter tunnel. This will includeclassifying the starter tunnel rock mass and comparing this in-SitUclassification with the rock mass classification assumptions used in the Package1A 'Starter Tunnel" design. In addition, all convergence measurements and(Continued on next page)

7 Initiator 1t4 Issuance ApWilliam R. Sublette 79QD w t aets B

15 Response Prompted 6- I I-)-I 16 Resporse Accepted

_ _R`_ C____atei____ADD Date17 Anended Response Accepted 18 Anended 'e Accepted

OR~t~lg ) for ,t i Date / O_ Date?2 I19 Corrective Actions Verified 20 Closure Ap_ by:

QAR Date QADD Date

Exhibit AP-16.1.1E11~LOs ;i

REV. 0&27/94

OFFICE OF CIVIUAN 8 CAR NO.: Y-94-073RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT PAGS: 2 OF 2

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGYWASHINGTON, D.C.

CORRECTIVE ACTION REQUEST (CONTINUATION PAGE)

5 Requirements (continued)

as set forth in reports or other documentation, shall be made available tocognizant design personnel.'

Section 3.2.3.1 'Design analyses shall be planned, controlled, anddocumented."

2) 10CFR60.14l(d) 'Confirmation of geotechnical and design parameters. Thesemeasurements and observations shall be compared with the original designbases and assumptions. If significant differences eMist between themeasurements and observations and the original design bases and assumptions,the need for modifications to the design or in construction methods shallbe determined and these differences and the recommended changes reportedto the Commission."

13 Recommended iction(s) (continued)

rockbolt load cell data should be evaluated and documented to validate that theengineered opening (starter tunnel) is performing as intended or as defined bya quantitative performance criteria (design criteria).

Exhb� QAP-1 6.1.2 REV. 2�14/94

ExhibkCLP-16.12 REV. 2/14194

K>.

Amended Response to CAR YM-94-073

The M&O will propose in the FY95 Engineering Plan a design validation plan to developtechnical data and information for possible use in performance confirmation. The plan willbe developed upon DOE approval of the Engineering Plan.

Expected completion date for the FY95 Engineering Plan, November 18, 1994, and the designvalidation plan, January 2, 1995.

Responsible Individual - Robert S. Saunders

{c, j t/4 Ll EM3 S. "41 )JV/5 -A/6

Amended Response To CAR YM-94-073

The M&O will propose in the FY95 Engineering Plan that a plan and procedures be developedfor implementing a portion of Performance Confirmation activities. The plan and procedureswill be developed upon DOE approval of the Engineering Plan. The A/E does not agree aboutthe arbitrary time frame (procedure should be in place prior to Phase 3 TBM Operations)contained in the recommendation section of the CAR. An amended response will be submittedfor the implementation date of the plans and procedures after consideration andapproval/disapproval by the DOE.

Aldevelopment ManagerMGDS Development Manager

Daet"

ql~v/6. C 14 H9/qt4 -7 7k

I - - g 8.OFFICE OF CIVILIAN

RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENTU.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

WASHINGTON, D.C.

CAR NO. YM-94-073

PAGE I OF I

QA

CORRECTIVE ACTION REQUEST (CONTINUATION PAGE)

EVALUATION OF AMENDED RESPONSE TO CAR YM-94-073

The DOE agrees that the M&O did consider information from construction of design package IA in the development of designpackage 2C; however, the M&O has not developed a plan/procedure for verifying the 2C design by collection of scientific dataduring construction of the ESF. In other words, the portion of this CAR that states 'Design Validation was not performed on theStarter Tunnel and used as input to the design of the North Ramp Package 2C." is no longer an issue; however, the second part ofthe Adverse Condition requires a new response.

The response is unacceptable for the following reason:

The M&O has not committed to development of a plan/procedure that addresses implementing a portion of PerformanceConfirmation activities during ESF construction. The scientific community has documented their activities in Study Plans and thedesign organization has communicated their needs to the scientific community via letters; however, the design organization has noprocedure that describes how they intend to use the data collected by the scientific community. The QARD, DOEIRW-0333P,Revision 1, Section 5 requires that work be prescribed by, and performed in accordance with, written implementing documents.OQA cannot find an M&O implementing document that describes the process of evaluating data from the scientific community todetermine that the Geotechnical design is valid, e.g. when the M&O obtains data from the scientific investigation what M&Oimplementing document describes how they document that they have evaluated that data and determined that no changes to theGeotechnical design are needed? How often is this evaluation done? Daily? Weekly?

RECOMMENDATIONS:

1. The response should commit to development of an appropriate implementing document.

2. This implementing document (plan/procedure) needs to be in place within a reasonable time after start of tunnel boring, i.e.tunnel boring operations can begin prior to development of this procedure; however, this procedure should be in place prior toPhase 3: Operation of the TBM and conduct of scientific investigations following installation of the mapping platform.

3. The M&O should consider use, of the attached terms when developing the implementing document.

-X9 flrcr� , G? A 1�

,.:a ,,tx �,, - I

;Z;C�'0"..X-c

. P0-flooxo�� - ,

Z5 1-116- -

IExlbit CAP- 6.1.2 R7REV. 06/27194

MA

OFFICE OF CIVILIAN CAR NO. YM-94-073

RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT PAGE I OF IU.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY HA

WASHINGTON, D.C.

CORRECTIVE ACTION REQUEST (CONTINUATION PAGE}

A¶TACHMENT TO EVALUATION OF RESPONSE TO CAR YM-94-073

Recommended Terms for Consideraion

DesignVenrfication- Design verification shall be performed using one or a combination of the following methods:

Design Review - A documented evaluation of design output during the design process to determine design adequacyand conformance to specified acceptance criteria

Alternate Calculations - Calculations that are made with alternate methods to verify correctness of the originalcalculation

Qualification Testing - A test that is intended to provide a desired level of confidence that an item meets specifiedcriteria

SOURCE: DOEIRW-0333P, Revision I OCRWM Quality Assurance Requirements and Description (QARD)

Performance Confirmation - The program of tests, experiments and analyses which is conducted to evaluate the accuracy andadequacy of the information used to determine with reasonable assurance that the performance objectives for the period afterpermanent closure will be met. (SOURCE: QARD)

Design Validation - That portion of Performance Confirmation that is used to ensure that geotechnical and design parameters usedfor the design of the ESF/Repository are confirmed (i.e. valid) and the engineered system is performing such that it meets theintended objectives of the performance or design criteria. The process of real time comparison during construction of in-situsubsurface conditions with design basis and assumptions to evaluate the need for design changes. This process also includes thereal time monitoring of the engineered systems to determine if their performance satisfies the objectives of the performance ordesign criteria.* (SOURCE: Proposed definition by R. Powe and W. Sublette)

Changes needed in design of the Repository to accommodateactual field conditions encountered will need to be reported to theNuclear Regulatory Commission (SOURCE: IOCFR60 Subpart F)

Exhibit ClAP-i 8.1.2 REV. O5IZ7I�4Exhibit CIAP-1 S. 1.2 REV. 0B127194

Amended Reseonse to Corrective Action Re0ort YM-94-073

Discussion

10 CFR 60.141.(a),(b) and (d) and the ESFDR 3.2.1.J9 requires that the design

validation activity be performed as part of the performance confirmation

process. It specifically states that the geotechnical in situ conditions found

should be compared with the original bases and assumptions. Further, the

design validation process should be a realtime activity that will provide the

justification and documentation for ground support as the excavation is

advancing. It did not happen in the Starter Tunnel, and the question is

whether it will happen in the North Ramp.

Investigative Action

The adverse condition statement uses the term validation which is not used

in 10 CFR 60.141.(a),(b) and (d) ESFDR Section 3.2.1.J9 or the QARD

Glossary.It is therefore assumed that the auditor is discussing performance

confirmation.

The initial statements made by the auditor concern the starter tunnel and

design package 1A. To address the ESFDR requirement 3.2.1.J the following

were initiated as to develop a geotechnical baseline in support of performance

confirmation:

* Geological mapping - USGS/USBR

* As-builting to record the type and location of ground support

* Deformation monitoring using extensometers

* Support load monitoring of selected rockbolts\

It should be noted that additional analyses will be performed on the existing

box cut and starter tunnel for the purpose of completing the headwall design

at the portal. The final phase of design verification of the 1A design package

will be initiated during the construction of the portal headwall, internal

concrete liner and invert for the starter tunnel. M

.

9/g9 L/? V. 4S!51. G H . g9-3

\- /1 i

The tunneling conditions and the methods of excavation and ground support have )limited bearing on the construction of the North Ramp which will utilize a TBM

mining system. When appropriate, relevant information derived from package 1AJ

has been considered in the Ground Support Scoping Analysis BABEAOOOO-01717-

0200-00008 Rev 01 as indicated on page 54 of 83:

The limited information obtained from NRG boreholes, and mapping in the

Starter Tunnel and Test Alcove 1, indicates that many of the joints are

discontinuous ....

The second part of the auditor's comment concerns relate to design validation

for the Design package 2C. Plans for construction monitoring and design

verification* have been discussed with the WBS 1.2.6 Manager and include for

FY 95 the following:

* Geological Mapping (USGS/USBR)

* Production of geotechnical as-builts (USGS/USBR)

* Construction as-builts Title III AlE

* Geotechnical instrumentation SNL ( Deformation monitoring, seismic

monitoring, blast vibration monitoring, Rock mass classification)

* Verification analyses A/E

Note: The term 'design verification * as used in this context is rot to be

confused with the QARD definition of design verification.

A summary of description of these design verification, construction monitoring

and mapping activities are discussed in the TS North Ramp Ground Support

Analyses BABEAOOOOO-01717-0200-00008 Section 10.12.8 page 74 of 84.

Complete details, can be obtained in the current revisions of:

* Study Plan 8.3.15.1.5 Excavation Investigations Studies

* Study Plan 8.3.15.1.8 In situ Design Verification Studies

* Study Plan 8.3.1.4.2.2 Site Characterization Mapping

to be implemented through Work Plans

2 m

K-

These activities will be performed for the A/E and coordinated by the TCO as

indicated in the referenced correspondence. The data and information needs to

complete design analyses have been identified in a series of letters:

'Meeting Notes For the Meeting Held June 16, 1994, On Sandia National

Laboraties Suport For Exploratory Studies Facility 1.2.6 (SCPB:N/A)

LA-EES-13-LV-06-94-028. H.Kalia/L.Costin to Distribution."

'Ground Support Design Verification Data Needs LV.ESSB.JHP.6/94-674 Sandifer

to Elkins.*

ORequest for Technical Support to provide Geological/Geotechnical data

Collection, Mapping and Reporting During Construction of the Exploratory

Sudies, Facility(ESF)(SCP/NA).LV.ESSB.JHP.3/94-595.0

The testing organizations have in response to the A/E's request for data and

information developed work plans which identify the tests and test activities

to be performed during the construction of the ESF. These plans can been seen

to support the acquistion of baseline geotechnical data and information for

performance confirmation (Ref. 10 CFR 60 140 (d)(2))

The process of ground support selection based on geotechnical criteria which

is subject to verification** by SNL under the Construction Monitoring and

Design Verification work plans, will provide the A/E with the basis to adjust

and/or substitute the ground support categories identified in Drawings

BABEABOOO-01717-2100-40151 through 40161. The real time adjustment of ground 'GD

support is described in Ground Support Scoping Analysis BABEAOOOO-01717-0200-

00008 Rev 01 as indicated on page 74 of 83:

'To meet the data needs of the A/E, technical activities are to be developed

to include:

* Evaluations of rock mass quality and other empirical geo-engineering

parameters will be made near the face continuously during TBM operations. The

evaluations will be made to support the M & 0 field change decisions to modify

ground support at the face during construction."

3

Remedial Action

See investigative action

Root Cause

See investigative action

Corrective Action.

See investigative action

4

Page I of 3

RESPONSE TO CAR NO. YM-94-073

DISCUSSION:

The Yucca Mountain Project" Review Record Memorandum for the ESF Title IDesign Acceptability Analysis and Comparative Evaluation of Alternative ESFLocations" document was prepared to determine what 10 CFR 60 requirements applyto ESF construction during site characterization.

This document was prepared in consultation with the NRC. Volume 2 contains anappendix titled "Correlation of Criteria Derived for ESF Physical Elements with 10CFR Part 60 Applicable Requirements". This appendix (pg 1.3-72) indicates thatcriteria 60.140(b), 60.141(a), 60.141(b), and 60.141(d) do not apply to the ESF.

Remedial Action:

Based on our review and investigative action below, no remedial action is necessary.

Investigative Action:

The adverse condition statement uses the term "validation" which is not used in 10CFR 60.141. (a), (b) and (d) ESFDR Section 3.2.1.J9 or the QARD Glossary (exceptfor software validation). It is therefore assumed that the auditor is discussingperformance confirmation.

Subpart F of 10 CFR 60 states in 60.140(b) under General Requirements, that theperformance confirmation program "...shall have been started during sitecharacterization and it will continue until permanent closure."

In 60.141(a) under Confirmation of Geotechnical and Design Parameters, it is furtherstated that "During repository construction and operation, a continuing program ofsurveillance, measurement, testing, and ..... to ensure that geotechnical and designparameters are confirmed to ensure that appropriate action is taken to inform theCommission of changes .......

The example given in the Adverse Condition for this CAR is in 10 CFR 60.141(d),which falls under the section describing the "continuing performance confirmationprogram" that is to be conducted during construction and operation, and therefore doesnot apply to ESF design and testing.

The initial statements made by the auditor concern the starter tunnel and designpackage IA. To address the ESFDR requirement 3.2.1.J, the following were initiated:

Z7/4 V L. V. US 6H. Of V Z3 9

s- / -

RESPONSE TO CAR NO. YM-94-073 Page 2 of 3

- Geological mapping - USGSIUSBR-- As-builting to record the type and location of ground support- Deformation monitoring using extensometers- Support load monitoring of selected rockbolts

It should be noted that additional analyses will be performed on the existing box cutand starter tunnel for the purpose of completing the headwall design at the portal. Thefinal phase of design verification of the 1A design package will be initiated during theconstruction of the portal headwall, internal concrete Liner and invert for the startertunnel.

There is no specific requirement to apply the results of design verification fromDesign Package 1A and apply them to Design Package 2C. Clearly the tunnelingconditions and the methods of excavation and ground support have limited bearing onthe construction of the North Ramp which will utilize a TBM mining system. Whatlimited, relevant information derived from package 1A has been considered in theGround Support Scoping Analysis BABEEA0000-0171700200-00008.

The second part of the auditor's comment concern relates to design validation for theDesign package 2C. Plans for construction monitoring and design verification havebeen discussed with the WBS 1.2.6 Manager and include for FY 95 the following:

- Geological Mapping (USGSIUSBR)- Production of geotechnical as-builts (USGS/USBR)- Construction as-builts Title m A/E- Geotechnical instrumentation SNL (Deformation monitoring, seismic

monitoring, blast vibration monitoring, Rock mass classification)- Design verification analyses A/E

A summary of these design verification, construction monitoring and mapping arediscussed in the TS North Ramp Ground Support Analyses BABEA00000-01717-0200-00008 Section 10.12.8 page 74 of 84.

Complete details can be obtained in the current revisions of:- Study Plan 8.3.15.1.5 Excavation Investigations Studies- Study Plan 8.3.15.1.8 In situ Design Verification Studies- Study Plan. 8.3.1.4.2.2 Site Characterization Mapping

These activities will be performed for the A/E and coordinated by the TestCoordination Organization.

The process of ground support selection based on geotechnical criteria and subjectverification by SNL under the Construction Monitoring and Design Verification willprovide the ANE with the basis to adjust and/or substitute ground support categories.

RESPONSE TO CAR NO. YM-94-073 Page 3 of 3

The five ground support categories are identified in the ground support in DrawingsBABEABOOO-01717-2100-40151 through 40161.

Root Cause:

Investigative action has determined that no procedural violation has occurred.

Corrective Action:

Investigative action has determined that no procedural violation has occurred.

CA M0951227REV. 1.0 12/27/94

M E M OConstruction Management Organization (CMO)

Construction Control Group (CCG)

TO: Distribution

FROM: Robert Adams (Phone 702/295-7322)

DATE: 27 December 94

SUBJECT: FY95 Construction Schedule Up-date

The attached ESF construction schedule has a data date of 4 December 94, and a plot date of23 December 94. If you have specific questions related to this schedule, please give me a call.

If you wish to be added or removed from distribution, contact William Blair at 5-4324.

Distribution:

See attached List

. C:SCHDIST1REV. 1.01201/94

Robert Adams

Distribution Mail Stop 523

W. BoyleM. BrodskyR. CraunW. DixonJ. DyerV. loriiJ. ReplogleR. SpenceB Vema

Aovity Ely bonyI Dlttpfols :.:: . *T tstiL1 Xr~rtepE :I Mle PW^ flh .: -

KJL ITiMAUKRWITY M VVKAEi A' 14rJ7TV~ 1WCCESS ROAD

*SECURllTf FENCINO

I I

a ia

I

* a

a 4a

---o I:~~~ZS a

* a

i

I

I

II

III

a

II014

IIIaI

I

J;IU' *UM *JVnL9 I -a Vwr

aStOAAOEIOLtOP FNONS)

cOpmrmxl MC pOtyCI,GENERAToR#OIESEL FUEL SYS

^ WA, .__

aIII

II.

III la -o II

i

C Tpf ITAL PAU id2S"Z§ I ____ _

EXTENSION

| | r. ; .-;*...J_ mm T1a'M w fww:pa

_ N_ N_Uraib 1U~ I rvE¶Ij' I*v mUF-M

STORAGE

P - : ';iMxpmr e

SUONM V CpollRF tvn YEYM aACCESS ROVAD

CONSTRU.CT m-'iKmrt IK A!RACE UTtW M

a_ - I

* a

* .

* I

* . . a

a - iI- I

- r Z |~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

:0 -l

@ - @ M X

j | -I I

-

.. . .. ........... a- .

I

I I I

I

(1L.LmE a nuV a *IJ a * q3rsp nnS

I *6 ACRES)--- I .-.- I

I-I

__ . , ' :J ::::_FLLwA.I m m lUL % VW OUI.C .1W e----- ---- - - - ... ". Oft wi 4&Wauoat". ^na at. at .£0 tJ-Ff.f. r-flM lYU:k;1#4- 1 WWAO

- t x _11E IRUF1(UlB1 LFLUtLL UtMNKA I sV rs grl

TFTyI,�-11ryXpRu�

II*§'

* _~ -*a _ a. a * a m * *a

V -4 a a

* a= a a @ a* a * - * a

I I I I , a . ,~

. * a a a a a

I I a a

. a a aw... a

)ENERAtORS

Itk.KA, ILP- FR *311 , , =sw

_~~~~wmx~ z7 nss*UtAR j ^iU1 .B)

V _~ IIs^2rre B:

aJVJEJ�t.� auj.Ds�a�., I a'lb IL raxmn-U IrKdV I aI,.ErwraVLCB00STERIEXILE)

lV:uzj-,

* ' 'I'~~~~~~~~~~

_ rr'tE"APItmrM-U LW% bUEI'Ly iJoU'1 a

%NCWM LOADS, lWWW-

II

Id

_ 0

LLI-.

IELOISEPTIC TANK

JSTE FaIROV-0a EIU a TRIEsVPIP 22AUK3 IEEXMtE uAPLAD) I

t1TH bUVUK1P'AGE V"Rm WATERY atK M IfFEwPaNG (OFF PACO

Ile Km.LUN cm1 F I AMP.V"~ MI) 0%' RUAF10 j.zuxmECD

-. .n sfau ur Iirrq ,nh~. f tURP

- I - ~~~~~~~~~~~ - I -~~~~~~~~

I I I I

I I I I

I I I I

I I I I

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~IEM -

I I

to * - 0

I

I

I

II

I

I

I

I

II6II

I

III

I

(

-; . t

I

I

- .-a ai

a a li

: ~ IkwkwiikiE*R

WA^B.R

-1!I I, ~ ~~~~~~~~ _______ Irt _

pblot, nllow a _Iww " Yucca Mountain Project _=

o .,ft "em _ Target Venus Actuat = I

40 ,rftoftm offlk beg, Level 2 Schedule = I

^C' Aw .I .'. , ! = .

MWSIAlSMTM N VEIR Iftia l- a a a

LEAO4 FIELD) . a a a *

VISWNR0 _-E9W-A U31616A_ 'FOOTINIS

SEWER . a a a a a a a a

DwrW~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Ie a a , L a a

WA1ER SYSTEM . . - a a

INSTALL STURAGETAWPADSI17U 15AUOI T1J a a a

ERECT WATER TAZETAN1 J11A1w JW3 a ar a

CONM SlRSURFAM VSX1VVEE IUW 9 a a .a . a.**.OOACCESS ROAD

* a a

SEPTIC TANK a - . -- '-

WAMI IESiNG u WIERTUE UrDW" 30 ,0 $§

WAT= HTAN*ACE

Wt- lI X I P C O V A I , _ N P L I N D U - 7 3 N U V 9 4

'PO ER CEWllR

: F" U MP" f ~t l V A 1R C F U m c Iv e m

ULOEAGROD POWR CEWlER ;;*

FIFWLRIT CANE MUST .13r UTEW . ._ M*R **

UPGRAMS - *

MULLA UvcX7nWN "URUIEf 15FE ,

LA80UNOAT'- ON

ncXIeV^:ig HAXP uliffta X1* I

IcHMAK 0= 0 bNEUT VFEU - a a a a a a a

1C(OPRfiSOPrANEfRATR . * **@8 <

a a a a a a a a a a a _

show i (d4 I 'CIL"__m" mjuinIIIIIII y WOm

_g FM" yeeco ow 0tpmow

mO_" 116c"

Yucca Mountain ProjectTarget Versus Actuals

Level 2 Schedule

VOW-- -- 11"Uhms- - IG�11pWw""

I

I.

- __ .___ . - . Ia--^caviW

DPIontULL n

; SLWO

NSALL KTEW COFIKE TWARER512 EK

"Uay arny ; ; .T .I- ..- _,-_X

4E I

IJ2FPR3IIII

a I* a a* @ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I

:ONSTRUCTION

,4ANGX1EiJsr. REWIVE 1 .XVS75ONG LEAD ITEMS

:WITAFWFx i I IALL Fs m$ECHAN9CAL)ELECTRICAL

W3EAWUU> .W"rKE FlERK R JIPMSNES

WTOIEAR BURARTj COMLETE I

RAAN40

UANSF;u R wl D5URlns T rJU#ECHA1NCAUELECTRICAL

ONVEYOR SYSTEM

IECOELECTWVACffIRE SYSTM

aMtSHES

1P0"J itHJU AJfMIC ltF

-II I

I I

. . A

I

I

IIa

IIa

IIa

_ J I I ' |_ , |

-, I~~~~~ I

I I II I I I

III

IIIII

of

_ .- ;4 -- i_ - ---- R

I I II ,I .

I 6

0 6 f

a a a II* a a a

* a a a .

* a * a

~~~~~~~~~I I

_ * a a aa a a ,a at a aa a aa a a *

_ f ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ a

i~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ a

a a a. a

, ~a a

a -

f

T1 _ - 1

a - ~ a

~~~~~~~-* t * a

a a I

I I

a a.a a1 -- -

a a~~

I I

I - mm d .

I I

a a |t a arvpw�jc rTI..Ivar- %,W-IUU -r_

..... a. a- _ _ a ,

.A.9-4.& ��F-R.!F� -_..rEVEI.l MUMA~ 5FC ORMAV1IF Offk

YAER

;)MPRESSORS

OMPRESSED AIR SYSTEM

nECI9TMC dI. I " IDtW.ONVEYOR SYS)

_UN~ IRtUu UFAnrJtI* JTN73)UPPESSED AIR SYSTEM

$'R MCONVR SYS)

arovasvrit VW IIA~ ItrWJLM

IIIII

I

I

I

I

I

6

I

I

4

I

II

I

I

I

0

1

I

I

I

I

II

I

I

4

IOIIIO

t

Ia___r_ a

I

NS

I-

- I- .

I011104GIIII

I

a I - I -

, a

.~~~

a a

I

a aa a

W~~~~~~~~~~~

4 a* a* aa aa aa a

a a

a a

** a

q a_ a

. a

I

IIII0I1001104

a a

I a* ' - - - -

* . a

* *E I A

I I I

* .. .a

,_ _ a aaL a_ a _ -I

- I - PNEIII

I

IIAM=$=0

STAifCWw, -R ,"_ ------- I a - I

. ..

ue n"A SW VIw" as e P a m. *at.mft% MM __mwf~w.0_ ne

._,

- s - s - w |

Yucca Mountain ProjectTarget Venus Actuals

Level 2 Schedule

N~~~t4,,,, ~ ~ tu ftub, 1w ;,;b - - &-i -_n-VRTAL

4EWpWnw I . . . . . . - * . - *.WVW ' _ t ~~~~~~~~~~* , a * a a

' j _~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~* ,

SUMRVD= Au - _ '

LECT & UEO ''-UMFOR - 05F E , ,.{>K . ' .- _.* , ,~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

-;UBStRFAW5SEMVLFC(I4P . .6 D-*')ECK a,

4ESUWrNMWTM_ UVfON 'U&IAAW ||

,v w W _ * , | | , *~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

EX IC WA SoI lo 10 W W

$$ @ - - ; ; * @~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

XCEt iG i h'WIRUt I ~' ' a

XOVEYOR SYSTEM a * * * a.XCAVATIb UHMiU JUAUEUW aaa

IIDGE is MO* KOOa * a

MRS 15~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~a a a a S

;s.30"~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ a a a -a -aa

_ ~ ~~~~~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~~~~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~~~~~~~~ a - , a a t.~~~~~~~~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~ a, ua : a a I. *: :

_~~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ a I

.AAM~.w R'U.15 U ~ ~t~a,_ a.. S * I a a a a S a a a a_

*m11 muse u ._.- -T a wom

Wmeat OWN Anmo wfse -a%W cuts

Yucca Mountain 1rJecTaget Ves Actws

Level 2 Scledule -_ -tEH�