Reply to “Commentary: Assessment of past infiltration fluxes through Yucca Mountain on the basis of the secondary mineral record—Is it a viable methodology?” by Y.V. Dublyansky and S.Z. Smirnov

Abstract

Many of the comments by Dublyansky and Smirnov (2005) on Marshall et al. (2003) reflect a longstanding debate over the origin of secondary calcite and opal deposits found in cavities and on fracture surfaces at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, site of a proposed high-level nuclear waste repository (US Department of Energy, 2001). These comments require consideration of data and interpretations beyond the scope of Marshall et al. (2003). Dublyansky et al. (2004) and Dublyansky et al. (2005) also have commented on papers published by Whelan et al. (2002) and Wilson et al. (2003), and we will refer to the replies to those comments (Whelan et al., 2004, Wilson and Cline, 2005) in addressing the comments that go beyond the scope of Marshall et al. (2003).