Going the Distance? The Safe Transport of Spent Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste in the United States (2006) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
5 Improving Spent Fuel and High-Level Waste Transportation in the United States
5 Improving Spent Fuel and High-Level Waste Transportation in the United States
Pages 212-272
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 212... ...
This distinction was made in recognition of the fact that the federal government is planning to initiate a large-scale, multidecade program to transport much of the nation's commercial spent nuclear fuel and Department of Energy (DOE) spent fuel and high-level radioactive waste to a federal repository.
|
From page 213... ...
5.1 PRINCIPAL FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION PRINCIPAL FINDING ON TRANSPORTATION SAFETY: The committee could identify no fundamental technical barriers to the safe1 transport of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste in the United States. Transport by highway (for small-quantity shipments)
|
From page 214... ...
The wording of this finding -- "The committee could identify no fundamental technical barriers to the safe transport of spent fuel and high-level radioactive waste in the United States" -- is carefully and narrowly constructed. This finding is focused on the technical aspects of transportation programs: package and conveyance design, fabrication, and maintenance and the conduct of transportation operations.
|
From page 215... ...
Several participants at the committee's information-gathering meetings highlighted security4 as an important current concern for transportation of spent fuel and high-level waste in the United States. The committee concurs with this view and judges that such concerns are likely to grow in the future, especially once shipments commence to centralized interim storage or a federal repository.
|
From page 216... ...
4. Acceptance order for commercial spent fuel transport to a federal repository (Section 5.2.4)
|
From page 217... ...
The committee does not endorse the development of an extended truck transportation program to ship spent fuel cross-country or within Nevada should DOE fail to complete construction of the Nevada rail spur or procure the necessary rail equipment by the time the federal repository is opened. RECOMMENDATION: DOE should fully implement its mostly rail decision by completing construction of the Nevada rail spur, obtaining the needed rail packages and conveyances, and working with commercial spent fuel owners to ensure that facilities are available at plants to support this option.
|
From page 218... ...
DOE has decided that the mostly rail alternative defined in the final Yucca Mountain Environmental Impact Statement (EIS; DOE, 2002a) is its preferred alternative for transporting spent fuel and high-level waste to a federal repository (DOE, 2004d)
|
From page 219... ...
Railroads in the United States are privately owned and operated, which allows for greater control over other activities on the rail line and a more coordinated regime for carrying out safety inspections. Rail transport can also result in reduced shipment travel times, especially if dedicated trains are used, which allows for the more efficient utilization of transport packages and conveyances.8 DOE's mostly rail transportation strategy will require the development of a rail spur within Nevada, because the Yucca Mountain site is currently without direct rail access.9 The final EIS (DOE, 2002a)
|
From page 220... ...
that it was beginning an EIS covering the selection of the alignment within the Caliente corridor and construction and operation of the rail line, with a draft to be issued in early 2005. The Caliente corridor begins at a point on the Union Pacific rail line near Caliente Nevada, 120 miles northeast of Yucca Mountain; runs west, passing north of the Nevada Test and Training Range, a military facility; and then turns south to Yucca Mountain (Figure 5.1)
|
From page 221... ...
Pahrump Jean Corridor Arizona (181 kilometers) FIGURE 5.1 Potential corridors for the Nevada rail spur.
|
From page 222... ...
. The possibility of a large volume of barge shipments of spent nuclear fuel has been a point of controversy.
|
From page 223... ...
Nevada officials stated to the committee that it is their expectation that, even with a Nevada rail link, at least 25 percent of 13Planning Information Corporation, The Transportation of Spent Nuclear Fuel and HighLevel Radioactive Waste: A Systematic Basis for Planning and Management at the National, Regional, and Community Levels, September 1996, http://www.state.nv.us/nucwaste/trans/ 1 p i c h o m e .
|
From page 224... ...
U.S. seeks ways to safely transport radioactive waste to Yucca Mountain.
|
From page 225... ...
The standard contract also establishes the priority order for DOE acceptance of commercial spent nuclear fuel as follows: · DOE acceptance will be based on the date and amount of fuel discharged from the reactor (see Sidebar 5.2 for further details) , except as noted in the next two bullets.
|
From page 226... ...
Loux from the State of Nevada made a similar statement to the committee as its meeting on Las Vegas on July 25, 2003. 18Statements of Margaret Chu and Jeff Williams to the Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board, January 28, 2003.
|
From page 227... ...
If the costs of standing up and operating the truck program were high, DOE might not have the resources to complete the construction and procurement of rail infrastructure, and DOE and the nation could be saddled with a long-term truck transportation program. Several challenging tasks remain before DOE will be in a position to fully implement the mostly rail option: · Completion of the Nevada rail EIS and construction of the Nevada rail line · Completion of the NSTI study on rail and barge infrastructure at commercial sites · Completion of the FICA surveys on infrastructure to load and handle shipping packages at commercial sites · Construction of any needed infrastructure improvements at commercial sites and along planned routes · Acquisition of a transport package and conveyance fleet to support the mode decision Time and adequate resources will be required to complete these tasks in advance of the opening of a federal repository at Yucca Mountain.
|
From page 228... ...
RECOMMENDATION: DOE should identify and make public its suite of preferred highway and rail routes for transporting spent fuel and high-level waste to a federal repository as soon as practicable to support state, tribal, and local planning, especially for emergency responder preparedness. DOE should follow the practices of its foreign research reactor spent fuel transport program of involving states and tribes in these route selections to obtain access to their familiarity with accident rates, traffic and road conditions, and emergency responder preparedness within their jurisdictions.
|
From page 229... ...
M-6) : Except for requirements contained in 10 CFR 73.37, there are no Federal regulations pertaining to rail routes for shipment of spent nuclear fuel or high-level radioactive waste.
|
From page 230... ...
On the other hand, DOE has shown a willingness to consult with states and tribes in planning for and carrying out spent fuel shipments. As described in some detail in Chapter 4, DOE consulted with South Carolina in developing rail routes for foreign research reactor spent fuel shipments to Savannah River.
|
From page 231... ...
23WGA, Policy Resolution 02-05: Transportation of Spent Nuclear Fuel and High-level Radioactive Waste, June 25, 2002.
|
From page 232... ...
Consequently, security arrangements and emergency responder preparation will require more resources and pose more difficult logistical problems. The WIPP transportation program is not a useful model for the transportation operations addressed by this study in other ways.
|
From page 233... ...
Certain additional practices and precautions would still be applied to such trains.24 During the 1960s, some railroads in the eastern United States announced that they would refuse to handle spent nuclear fuel and some other radioactive waste shipments under the rates and terms of common carriage (i.e., by general train service)
|
From page 234... ...
J-76) that "DOE has not determined the commercial arrangements it would request from railroads for shipment of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste." It acknowledged the policy of the railroad industry favoring dedicated trains but also cited a 1998 study by the Research and Special Programs Administration29 (RSPA)
|
From page 235... ...
without incident may be lower due to decreased time in transit." · Dedicated trains have "potential advantages" for security, although "DOE shipments have been and will continue to be made securely using both [dedicated train service] and general freight service." · The "primary benefit" of dedicated trains would be "significant cost savings over the lifetime of the Yucca Mountain project" because any higher costs of dedicated train operations would be offset by savings from shorter transit and turnaround times, which allow operations with fewer packages and railcars.
|
From page 236... ...
However, the FRA report argues that the disadvantage of dedicated trains in this respect would be less than proportional to the increase in train-miles because superior equipment and operational requirements would be placed on dedicated trains and because the frequency of some operations that carry higher risks, such as switching at the origin point of the shipment, would be the same whether dedicated trains or regular service were employed. Although DOE's policy statement on dedicated trains, along with the railroads' professed unwillingness to handle spent nuclear fuel in regular service, would appear to settle the question, critics of DOE's Yucca mountain repository plan have noted that the wording of the policy statement is vague on some points.
|
From page 237... ...
that could contribute to such accidents. 5.2.4 Acceptance Order for Commercial Spent Fuel Transport to a Federal Repository FINDING: The order for accepting commercial spent fuel that is mandated by the Nuclear Waste Policy Act (NWPA)
|
From page 238... ...
spent fuel first and for initiating the transportation program with relatively short, logistically simple movements to gain experience and build operator and public confidence. RECOMMENDATION: DOE should negotiate with commercial spent fuel owners to ship older fuel first to a federal repository or federal interim storage, except in cases (if any)
|
From page 239... ...
Owners who have allocations near the begin ning of the acceptance queue made earlier payments into the Nuclear Waste Fund and have had to bear the costs for on-site spent fuel storage for a longer period of time. These owners are able to ship their spent fuel to the federal repository first, relieving them of further on-site storage costs.
|
From page 240... ...
The order for acceptance of spent fuel from commercial owners prescribed by the standard contract could require DOE to initiate its transportation program with movements of spent fuel from multiple, geographically dispersed sites. It gives DOE limited control over the age and radiological content of the fuel that is offered for transport.34 It provides little opportu 34The lack of DOE control over the age and radiological content of spent fuel offered for transport also has cost and operational implications for the repository receiving facility.
|
From page 241... ...
For reasons described in more detail below, it would be preferable from a safety standpoint to ship older spent fuel first to the federal repository. Under the current standard contract system, owners of commercial spent fuel are not required to ship older fuel first, however.
|
From page 242... ...
GAO found that the standard contracts between DOE and industry constrain DOE's ability to minimize the number of shipments or to control the order in which stocks of spent fuel are picked up. GAO analyzed DOE's current plans for acceptance of spent fuel from commercial nuclear plant sites.
|
From page 243... ...
The committee has not examined at-plant storage risks and 40As noted in Chapter 1, the committee was unable to perform an assessment of transportation security. If security threats do turn out to be a serious concern for spent fuel transport, then shipping older fuel first could help to reduce those threats by reducing inventories of radioactive materials in transportation packages.
|
From page 244... ...
for commercial spent fuel after discharge from a reactor. Decay heat drops by about a factor of 100 during the first year after its removal from a reactor.
|
From page 245... ...
· DOE could initiate its transportation program by shipping spent fuel from one or two sites that were located close to main line rail routes, thereby reducing burdens on federal agencies and/or states for route security inspections, emergency responder training, and en route inspections. · Some of these shut-down sites have enough stored spent fuel to support an extended shipping campaign, which would further reduce burdens for inspections and emergency responder training.
|
From page 246... ...
Such an operation could be part of a pilot program by DOE to gain experience and build public confidence45 by demonstrating an ability to transport spent fuel to Yucca Mountain in a safe, secure, and operationally effective manner. These advantages are further elaborated in another National Research Council report (NRC, 2003)
|
From page 247... ...
5.2.5 Emergency Response Planning and Training FINDING: Emergency responder preparedness is an essential element of safe and effective programs for transporting spent fuel and high-level waste. Emergency responder preparedness has so far received limited attention from DOE, states, and tribes for the planned transportation program to the federal repository.
|
From page 248... ...
use emergency responder preparedness programs as an outreach mechanism to communicate broadly about plans and programs for transporting spent fuel and high-level waste to a federal repository with communities along planned shipping routes. The transportation of spent nuclear fuel to a federal repository would utilize the same state, tribal, and local emergency response capabilities that are in place to deal with existing hazardous materials transport accidents and incidents (see Appendix C)
|
From page 249... ...
For safe routine transportation of spent nuclear fuel and high-level waste, it is OCRWM's policy to provide each eligible state and tribe the funding and technical assistance to prepare for safety and enforcement inspections of NWPA highway shipments, for rail measures that complement FRA inspection procedures, and for access to satellite tracking equipment and training on that equipment in cases where the capability does not already exist. To carry out this policy, DOE intends to make two types of grants available to eligible states and tribal nations: 1.
|
From page 250... ...
Occupational Safety and Health Administration regulations (29 CFR 1910.120) require that emergency responder training for "hazardous substanc es" (which includes radioactive materials)
|
From page 251... ...
This training is for individuals who have similar responsibilities to a hazardous materials technician but with more directed knowledge of the hazardous substances that they are called upon to contain. They are required to have at least 24 hours of training at the technician level and be able to demonstrate competence in the following: ability to implement the local emer gency response plan and knowledge of the state response plan; understanding classification, identification, and verification of known and unknown substances using advanced survey instruments; ability to select and use specialized personnel protective equipment; an in-depth understanding of hazard and risk assessment techniques; ability to perform specialized control, containment or confinement op erations; ability to determine and implement decontamination procedures; ability to develop a site safety and control plan; understanding of chemical, radiological, and toxicological terminology and behavior.
|
From page 252... ...
The planning tools include models for developing needs assessments, preparedness plan 47Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management; Safe Routine Transportation and Emergency Response Training; Technical Assistance and Funding. 63 FR 2375723766, April 30, 1998.
|
From page 253... ...
The WIPP program was willing to go beyond its legally mandated requirements in planning and implementing its transportation program. For example, DOE executed a memorandum of understanding with the WGA and Southern States Energy Board that included emergency response operations.
|
From page 254... ...
254 FIGURE 5.3 Routes used for shipping transuranic waste to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant near Carlsbad, New Mexico. SOURCE: Modified from http://www.wipp.ws/routes.htm.
|
From page 255... ...
While the WIPP experience offers some useful lessons, the experience may not be scalable to the Yucca Mountain transportation program. DOE will have to provide training assistance to emergency responders along planned shipping routes in up to 45 states.
|
From page 256... ...
DOE could focus its early assistance on training-the-trainer and other long-term activities such as planning for equipment procurements, calibrations, upgrades, and replacements of radiation detection instruments used by emergency responders.50 There are even benefits, albeit more indirect, to be gained from training volunteer emergency responders who may leave their posts before the transportation program begins operating: these people live in the communities through which these shipments will pass and some are community leaders. They can serve as informal but important sources of information to their communities about DOE's transportation program.
|
From page 257... ...
Although the discussion in this section has focused on the federal repository transportation program operated by DOE, the committee's suggested innovations are also potentially applicable to the transportation program operated by Private Fuel Storage, LLC. This private transportation program has no legal responsibility under the NWPA to support emergency responder preparedness along its shipping routes.
|
From page 258... ...
In a representative democracy, citizens have a general right, subject to legitimate privacy and national security restrictions, to obtain information about government programs that affect their communities. Such sharing of information might also help to build community trust and confidence in transportation programs and help implementers to identify and manage the social risks described in Chapter 3 (Section 3.2)
|
From page 259... ...
. The TEC Working Group, which advises the Yucca Mountain transportation program, has provided suggestions on best practices to assist DOE program managers "in their efforts to communicate about radioactive materials transportation in a manner that is responsive to the needs and concerns of stakeholders" (TEC, 2002, p.
|
From page 260... ...
Moreover, the current program may have difficulty supporting what appears to be an expanding future mission to transport commercial spent nuclear fuel for interim storage or reprocessing. In the committee's judgment, changing the organizational structure of this program will improve its chances for success.
|
From page 261... ...
a fully private organization operated by the commercial nuclear industry. The latter two options would require changes to the Nuclear Waste Policy Act.
|
From page 262... ...
The transportation program's schedule is linked to the schedule for opening the repository. The last announced schedule for the transportation program included the following milestones: · Complete work on the Nevada rail EIS and issue a ROD on the specific alignment in early 2006.
|
From page 263... ...
Funding for the Yucca Mountain Program comes from a combination of direct federal appropriations to cover the costs of disposing of defense spent fuel and high-level waste and the Nuclear Waste Fund (Appendix C) to cover the costs of commercial spent fuel disposal.
|
From page 264... ...
The administration intended to obtain the remaining funding from the Nuclear Waste Fund and unsuccessfully attempted to have that fund taken "off budget," which would have freed it from the annual congressional appropriations process. bDoes not include the $50 million appropriated by Congress in fiscal year 2006 for initiation of a site selection process for an integrated spent fuel recycling facility.
|
From page 265... ...
: Integrated spent fuel recycling -- Given the uncertainties surrounding the Yucca Mountain license application process, the conferees provide $50,000,000, not derived from the Nuclear Waste Fund, for the Depart ment to develop a spent nuclear fuel recycling plan.
|
From page 266... ...
.56 This fact alone argues for the establishment of a generic federal transportation capability that could service a repository and possibly other government transportation needs. Under the current organizational structure for the transportation program, all of the federal government's transportation "eggs" have been placed in the federal repository basket.
|
From page 267... ...
First, within the current structure of the NWPA, the transportation program could be organized as the Nuclear Waste Transportation Administration, a quasi-independent DOE office program reporting directly to upper-level DOE management (i.e., the DOE secretary, deputy secretary, or under secretary)
|
From page 268... ...
within DOT Quasi-Government Corporation · Private-sector organization with partial government ownership · Would have exclusive authority to take title to commercial spent fuel for the purposes of transport to a federal repository or federal interim storage · Would be subject to the full regulatory authority of government for corporate finances and governance, worker and public health and safety, and transportation safety and security · Could be chartered to be responsive to public participation and the social risk concerns (Chapter 3) · Would require changes to the current NWPA to implement · Organizational models: British Nuclear Fuels Limited and AREVA Private Company · Similar to quasi-government corporation but with full private ownership · Could be the most effective option for solving the spent fuel acceptance order problem Would require changes to the current NWPA to implement · · Organizational model: Private Fuel Storage, LLC construct the Nevada rail spur58 and purchase transportation packages and conveyances.
|
From page 269... ...
The administration has developed a skilled staff with the core competencies required to carry out its missions. A successful Nuclear Waste Transportation Administration would be similar in many respects to the FHWA.
|
From page 270... ...
(1998) reported the results of a national survey that asked respondents whether they preferred having the federal government manage nuclear waste transportation directly or contract with private companies to manage it.
|
From page 271... ...
However, this might be the most effective option for addressing the commercial spent fuel acceptance order issue (Section 5.2.4) , especially if owners had collective economic incentives to maximize the efficiency of the transportation program,62 and individual owner interests did not trump these collective incentives.
|
From page 272... ...
. However, the committee also saw clear evidence that the current organizational structure for the transportation program is impeding such an integrated approach because, as noted previously, the program does not have the autonomy and funding necessary to execute its mission.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.