Survey of Existing Underground Openings for In-Situ Experimental Facilities - April 1981 Revised July 1981 - Report

Sep 4, 2026

Uploaded by Eden

Survey compiles and evaluates existing underground openings suitable for in-situ experimental facilities for high level waste technical development. It inventories sites identified through literature search and later investigation, then applies stated criteria covering geologic setting, depth, hydrologic setting, workings, accessibility, and amenability of owners and operators. Sites are characterized and ranked across primary and secondary granitic, schistose rock, and volcanic rock categories, followed by recommendations and appendix descriptions of visited openings.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages110

Reading Time4 h 37 min

AccessFree to download

Summary

Background

Geologic Setting

Depth

Hydrologic Setting

Workings

Accessibility

Amenability of Owners and Operators

Site Characteristics and Ranking of Sites

Primary Granitic Rock Sites

Secondary Granitic Sites

Schistose Rock Sites

Volcanic Rock Sites

Recommendations

Appendix A- Descriptions of Openings Visited

Primary Granitic Rock Sites

Secondary Granitic Sites

Schistose Rock Sites

Volcanic Rock Sites

References

DE82013707 SURVEY OF EXISTING UNDERGROUND OPENINGSFOR IN-SITU EXPERIMENTAL FACILITIES MOTICE PORT70NS OF THS BEPCRT AFELEILEIt has ea raproduceu tromte bestavalisbe eopy to permit the broadestpossibo availabiity. H.Wollenberg,A.Graf,and B.Strisower Earth Sciences DivisionLawrence Berkeley LaboratoryUniversity of CalifornlaBerkeley,California 94720 and G.KorbinGeotechnical Consultant оасиамин | | | --- | Apri11981(Revised July 1981) Prepared for High Level Waste Technical Development BranchDIvision of Waste Management office of Nuclear Material safety and SafeguardsU.s.Nuclear Regulatory CommissionWashington,D.c.20555 This work was supported by the U.s.Department of Energyunder Contract No,W-7405-ENG-48 and by N.R.C.FIN No,B 3110-0under Interagency Agreement DOE 50-80-97 CONTENTS Pages I1lustrations…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………iv Tables…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………vii Summary…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………1 1.Background…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………3 2. Criteria…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………10 …………………………………………………10 2.1 Geologic Setting…………………………………… 2.2 Depth……………………………………………………………………………………102.3 Hydrologic Setting……………………………………………………………………………………………………………11 2.4 Workings……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………11 2.5 Accessibility……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………12 2.6 Amenability of Owners and Operators…………………………………… ……………………………12 …………………………………………………13 3. site Characteristics and Ranking of sites…………… 3.1 Primary Granitic Rock sites…………………………………………………………………………………………14 3.2 Secondary Granitic sites ……………………………………………………………………………………………17 3.3 Schistose Rock sites………………………………………………………………………………………………………21 3.4 Volcanic Rock Sites……………………………………………………………………………………………………………24 4. Recommendations………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………27 Appendix A- Descriptions of Openings Visited……………………………………………………………………30 A.1 Primary Granitic Rock Sites…………………………………………………………………………………………30 A.1.1 He¹ms Pumpei Storage Project……………………………………………………30A.1.2 Tungsten Queen Mine ……………………………………………………………………………………………42 A.1.3 Mount Hope Mine …………………………………………………………………………………………………57 A.1.4 Minnamax Project…………………………………………………………………………………………74 A.2 Secondary Granitic Sites……………………… A.2.1 Dworshak Dam………………………………… Balmat-Edwards Mines……………………… A.2.2 Pine Creek Mine………………………………………………… A.2.3 A.2.4 Emerson Mine…………………………………………………… A.2.5 Colorado School of Mines student Mine Fairmont Mine………………………………………………………… A.2.6 A.3 Schistose Rock sites……………………………………………………… A.3.1 Copperhill Operations………………… A.3.2.Sunrise Mine……………………………………………… A.3.3 Sunshine Mine………………………………………………… A.4 Volcanic Rock sites……………………………………………………… ………………………………………………100 A.4.1 Oregon Dam Sites…………………………… ………………………100 Detroit Dam……………………………………… …………………………………100 Cougar Dam…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………101 Lost Creek Dam……………………………………………………………………………………………………………101 References………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………103 ILLUSTRATIONS Figure 1. Locations of underground workings identified in initial literature search…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………5 Figure 2. Locations of underground workings visited during this phase of the investigation…………………………………………………………………………………………………………9 Figure 3. Location of Helms Pumped Storage Project,60 miles east of Fresno,California……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………31 Figure 4. original and modified layouts of underground powerhouse complex,Helms Pumped Storage Project………………………………………………………………32 Figure 5. Plan and profile,Helms Pumped Storage Project…………………………………33 Figure 6. Portal to access tunnel,Helms Pumped Storage Project……………………35 Figure 7. Profile along possible alignment of access drift to experimental facility,Helms Punped Stora

FAQs

该报告主要调查什么内容？

报告调查并评估可用于原位实验设施的现有地下开口/地下工程，并对相关地点进行汇总与分析。

用于筛选与评价站点的主要标准有哪些？

标准包括地质环境、埋深、水文地质条件、地下工程/工作面特征、可达性，以及业主与运营方的适配性等。

报告如何对不同岩性类型的站点进行组织与排名？

报告将站点按主要花岗岩、次要花岗岩、片麻岩（schistose rock）和火成岩（volcanic rock）等类别进行描述，并在各类别下形成特征与排名，最后给出建议。

Sep 4, 2026

Uploaded by Eden