Aespoe Task Force on modelling of groundwater flow and transport of solutes. Review of Task 6C

This report forms part of an independent review of the specifications, execution and results of Task 6 of the Aespoe Task Force on Modelling of Groundwater Flow and Transport of Solutes, which is seeking to provide a bridge between site characterization (SC) and performance assessment (PA) approaches to solute transport in fractured rock. The present report is concerned solely with Task 6C, which relates to the construction and parametrisation of a block-scale hydrostructural model of the TRUE Block Scale region of the Aespoe Hard Rock laboratory. The task objectives, specifications and outcome are summarised and reviewed. Also, consideration is given to how the hydrostructural model might affect the outcomes of Task 6D and 6E. The main conclusions of this review are summarised below: The Task 6C hydrostructural model is a more comprehensive approach to quantitatively describing a volume of fractured rock than has been achieved hitherto. The idea of including solute retention characteristics as indices attached to individual fractures is an efficient device resulting in a whole volume of fractured rock described by a few spreadsheets. The hydrostructural model is clearly defined and provides a useful test bed for Tasks 6D and 6E. It would have been beneficial if the specifications for Task 6C had been more clearly defined as a hierarchy of requirements, and performance measures had been defined and evaluated to allow comparison of alternative approaches. The device used to reduce connectivity, namely reducing the average size of background fractures, has the effect of producing a final model with an 'unnatural' gap in the overall distribution of fracture sizes. It appears that the exploratory boreholes could be important conductive structures within the region of the 200 m block even though they are segmented into shorter sections by packers. If correct, this implies that the boreholes should be included explicitly in the model if close replication of TRUE Block Scale test behaviour is desired. Overall, when compared to the results from the TRUE Block Scale test, the hydrostructural model seems to be too well connected. In this context, it is not clear whether the Task 6C model has been checked for consistency with the hydraulic testing results from the TRUE Block. Scale test area. Whilst it is not the purpose of the Task 6C model to represent the TRUE Block Scale area as accurately as possible, the construction of a model, broadly based on the TRUE Block Scale area, but with too much connectivity, could have the unfortunate result that in Tasks 6D and 6E solutes do not have sufficient time to interact with the rock pore spaces