Report of the Peer Review Panel for the Rainier Mesa/Shoshone Mountain Flow and Transport Model, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada, Revision 0
The stated purpose of the peer review is to determine whether the model, results, interpretations, and documentation are consistent with the requirements of the FFACO Alternative Modeling Strategy and Decision Process for closure of the CAU. The Peer Review Panel was asked to explicitly answer six questions that provide an overview to its conclusions and recommendations. These six questions and the panel’s responses are presented in the next section of this review report. The Peer Review Panel was asked to present and summarize its primary findings by answering six key peer review questions. These questions are as follows: 1.Is the implementation of the AMS technically and regulatorily sound and defensible? 2.Have conceptual models and/or alternatives for groundwater flow and radionuclide transport in the RM/SM system, permissible based upon available data and observations, been identified to support analyses of radionuclide migration away from the testing areas toward potential receptors? 3.Based on available data that include “maximum transport” and “minimum transport,” do the forecasts represent a range of plausible scenarios and address assumptions for parameters that are most sensitive for saturated zone flow and transport? 4.Can radionuclide transport forecasts be used as an aid in evaluating potential exposure pathways, as intended by the AMS? 5.Has the extent of contamination been bounded such that a regulatory decision can be made regarding CAU closure that is protective of human health and the environment? 6.Has anything that influences the protection of human health and the environment been missed?