Packaging and Transportation of Radioactive Materials (PATRAM) International Symposium
Miami, FL - October 21-26, 2007
~ MEETING SUMMARY ~
Oct. 22 - OPENING PLENARY
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Update
Dale Klein, Chairman; Nuclear Regulatory Commission
The NRC recently received its first application for a new nuclear power plant in decades, and expect 15-20 more applications in the next year and a half. The NRC will not be a bottleneck to new plants, but will also not compromise on safety.
The general public is not familiar with the extremely safe record of radioactive waste transportation around the world precisely because it has been so safe and uneventful. The public will need to be comfortable with transportation, though, if it is to support a nuclear renaissance. The public should also be informed of natural and background radiation for comparison purposes.
Government/industry must develop a clear plan for next generation packaging designs, which the NRC will regulate. There should be an extension of international cooperation in the nuclear field to the Transportation, Aging, and Disposal (TAD) canister concept. An international standard approach for evaluation of waste forms and waste packages would be beneficial, and international repositories may even be possible in the future. Transportation standards need only be changed if necessary for safety.
Radiation detection is occurring at ports and airports across the U.S. There are legitimate concerns about global terrorism, but these concerns must be addressed without building too many roadblocks to the free flow of commerce.
Yucca Mountain Project Update
Ward Sproat, Director; DOE Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management (OCRWM)
The worldwide nuclear transportation safety record is unsurpassed in the shipping industry.
121 sites in 39 states around the U.S. will be shipping waste to Yucca Mountain, Nevada.
The Bush administration is promoting nuclear energy as a clean, safe, and reliable energy source which will reduce the need to import fossil fuels. Mr. Sproat took the OCRWM director position to advance the nuclear power industry by making progress on the congressional mandate to develop a geologic repository for nuclear waste.
All three branches of the U.S. government have supported the Yucca Mountain repository (over the Nevada governor's veto). The current focus of OCRWM is to get the facility licensed by the NRC.
Mr. Sproat has four programmatic strategic objectives:
- Yucca Mountain license application - submit to the NRC by June 2008.
- National Transportation Plan - Brings the capital projects, operational planning efforts, and stakeholder collaboration together into one document. Second revision is currently under review and the revised draft is due out this fall. It will be a living document.
- Staffing culture - Want the staff makeup, expertise, and philosophy to match evolving needs of the project.
- Liability - Address the federal government's contractual obligations to pick up spent nuclear fuel from utilities. The financial burdens to taxpayers of not doing so are mounting.
Recent OCRWM Accomplishments:
- TAD canister specifications issued for design and certification
- Draft EISs for the Yucca Mountain project released in Oct. 2007.
- 180(c) federal register notice (for the allocation of funds to states and tribes for emergency preparedness along transportation routes) released in July 2007.
- Documentation to the Licensing Support Network (an online database of 3 million documents supporting the Yucca Mountain license application) certified.
Challenge: Maintain exemplary transportation safety record, which does not garner public attention, yet get the word out to the public that transporting nuclear waste is not new or dangerous.
Emerging Issues in Radioactive Material Transport
Lorne Green, Secretary General; World Nuclear Transport Institute
The public seems to be skeptical of nuclear power because of global terrorism, but is also eager for clean sources of energy stemming from concerns about climate change.
The difference between locations of uranium supplies and where they will be most demanded (far east and south Asia), will require increased international transportation.
GNEP aspects:
- Next generation nuclear reactors
- Nuclear fuel bank
- Russia - enrichment center
- Will need to address transport of nuclear materials in the GNEP program - have not done so yet in the strategic plan.
A serious concern at the moment in international nuclear transportation is denial or delay of shipments. Port issues/burdens may stymie shipments of Class 7 (radioactive materials) cargo. Commercial shippers may not find it economical to ship these material - differing national requirements add to complexity and confusion.
Public perception can't be changed with just the facts of a safety record and robust testing of containers; nuclear interests will need to apply empathy for the public's concerns.
Panel Q&A:
When will the first shipment to Yucca Mountain occur? How many shipments will there be per year?
- With an unconstrained cash flow, the best attainable date is March 2017. This is not the most probable, however, because licensing will likely take longer and there will be funding/legal issues. So the program is estimating closer to 2020-2021.
- The bulk of the waste will be moved by rail - 140 trains/year (4-5 cars per train). 35 truck shipments are also estimated per year.
The 70,000 metric ton capacity limit of Yucca Mountain would only cover the existing volume of waste. Will the U.S. need another repository? What about recycling?
- Law now allows only 70,000 metric tons of waste to be buried at Yucca Mountain. Current fleet will have discharged 70,000 by the spring of 2010.
- Supplemental EIS studied 135,000 metric tons, which will be the amount of waste generated by the existing nuclear fleet if all licenses are renewed.
- Sent legislation to Congress to repeal the statutory limit of 70,000 and base it instead on science, but it hasn't seen action yet.
- DOE must report to Congress on the need for second repository, and Sproat intends to do so in the next 14 months before his term is done. Sproat will recommend another repository is needed if the capacity limit is not lifted.
- Reprocessing will not help the capacity limit issue because the statute language is based on the amount of the "original" source of waste.
Comment: Stakeholder dialogue is critical. Students are not studying science as much as they were in the past, so the next generation will need to be reached in other ways (emotional).
The TAD concept is a big change from decisions of a few years ago. How do you ensure quality assurance when the fuel loading for TADs will need to be accomplished at many sites around the country (instead of all occurring at Yucca Mountain)?
- The concept of a standardized canister is to reduce risk by less fuel handling.
- Utilities are NRC licensees for fuel handling and movement - must meet quality assurance. Will need to package fuel at the reactor anyway, so why not only do it once into a canister that can go directly into the repository?
---------------------------
CONCURRENT TECHNICAL SESSION
Security and Risk Assessment Overview
Radioactive Material Transport Security - Awareness and Application of New Recommendations
Ann-Margreth Eriksson Eklund; International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
IAEA's Code of Conduct lists radioactive materials (RAM) as one of nine "dangerous" goods subject to international transport regulations. IAEA developed guidance recommendations for nation states for implementing or enhancing Class 7 (RAM) transport security. IAEA seeks consistency in security transport among nation states and among the various categories of dangerous sources.
Worldwide transport security training is being conducted, similar to the U.S. Modular Emergency Response Radiological Transportation Training (MERRTT). The first training took place in China in May 2007. Another will occur in Peru this month. Three-four regional meetings are scheduled for 2008.
Transportation Safety Risk for Source Recovery versus Consequence of Leaving Radioactive Sources in Place and Vulnerable Due to Limited Transport Options or Denial of Shipment
Justin M. Griffin; Los Alamos National Laboratory
Since 1999, the Off-site Source Recovery Project (OSRP) has recovered more than 15,000 radioactive sources in the U.S. and 300 internationally.
A Government Accountability Office survey in 2003 estimated 7.8 million radioactive sources are still out there, dispersed among former users.
Unwanted sources should be sent back to the manufacturer for proper disposition. Sometimes there are denials or delays of shipments, though, because of concerns with the radiological character of the material being transported. Despite these denials, approx. 28 million shipments of radioactive material took place between 1997 and 2006.
Q&A
Is the U.S. going into other countries for recovery?
- Recover only U.S. origin sources from other countries.
What types of packages are used in transport?
- For low-activity sources, such as plutonium, use Type A neutron shipping and disposition packages. Working on designs for international transport of higher-activity sources.
Where is the material disposed?
- Collected at a consolidation center at Los Alamos and disposed of at WIPP when appropriate.
Oct. 23 - OPENING PLENARY
Ann-Margreth Eriksson Eklund; International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
IAEA was created in 1957 and based on Eisenhower's Atoms for Peace speech to the United Nations in 1953. There are 143 member states.
Seventy-five member states have signed on to the Code of Conduct on Safety and Security of Radioactive Sources as of 2002. There is no mandate to join, it is done upon request/volunteer.
One hundred and sixteen member states joined the Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material, which involves protection of nuclear material in use, storage, and transport.
The IAEA identifies three lines of defense: prevention, detection, and response.
A Nuclear Security Plan was adopted in 2005, and is good for four years. Transport Safety Regulations have also been adopted regarding classification, containment, etc. Proposed revisions to the plan are available on the web. Additional guides available include those on sabotage and verification of shipments.
Denial of Shipments is a major concern - medical isotopes have short half-lives and must be transported by air. IAEA has held many region-specific conferences to address denial concerns.
ITDB program (Illicit trafficking in nuclear and other radioactive materials) is a unique network of points of contact in 95 nation states to track incidents of unauthorized acquisition, use, or transfer of nuclear materials.
-------------------------
CONCURRENT TECHNICAL SESSION
Radiation Protection
Issues on Exemption Levels for Package Surface Contamination
Haruyuki Ogino; Central Research Institute of Electric Power Industry, Japan
IAEA Transport Regulation limits for surface contamination on casks are based on the types of emitters: beta, gamma, low toxicity alpha (4 Bq/cm2) - and other alpha (0.4 Bq/cm2).
Dose criteria of 0.01 mSv/y is based on the IAEA Basic Safety Standards (BSS) - worldwide consensus. Exemption levels change for different element emitters.
Conclusion: The exemption levels for alpha emitters and Cobalt 60 are extremely low and not practical in comparison with the current regulatory requirements. The scenarios and exemption levels ought to be less conservative.
Public Comment: Dangerous not to consider all parameters. These standards were based on multiple parameters not examined in this study.
Establishing Risk-Informed Non-Fixed Surface Contamination Limits for Spent Fuel Transportation Casks
Richard R. Rawl; Oak Ridge National Laboratory
IAEA Transport Regulations setting limits of 4 and 0.4 (as explained above) were adopted in 1961. Radiation protection practices and materials have improved since then.
A 2001 IAEA Coordinated Research Project (CRP) studied whether these limits ought to be changed. A basic model was developed on four types of packages: small manually-handled, small remotely-handled, large remotely-handled, and spent fuel casks. The 2005 CRP report found allowable dose per unit activity should depend strongly on the radionuclide, and that the maximum dose to workers is hundred to thousands of times greater than the maximum dose to members of the public.
Cobalt 60, a beta/gamma emitter, is typically a major source of activity on casks. It acts as a good conservative, but not overly conservative, marker for spent fuel casks. 40 Bq/cm2 or 10 times the current limit, was found to be adequately cautious for beta-gamma emitters.
Plutonium 239 is a typical alpha emitter on spent fuel casks. The current limit of 0.4 is adequately cautious.
Transport of Low-Level Naturally-Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM) - A Case for Consistency and Practicality
Richard R. Rawl; Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Need to change provisions of 1996 to a more practical level so that low-level NORM are not defined as Class 7 radioactive material, requiring particular regulations that will stymie industrial trade and transport of goods (oil, mining ores) which do not pose the same risk during transport. Regulations/provisions ought to be based on a material's measurable radionuclide content, not its previous or intended use - as it is now.
------------------------------
CONCURRENT TECHNICAL SESSION
International Security Efforts and Emergency Response
Parametric Study of the Release of Spent Fuel Aerosol Resulting from HEDD Attack
Robert E. Luna, Ph.D; Consultant
Studied the effects of a High Energy Density Devise (HEDD) - armor piercing - attack on a cask resulting in a release of spent fuel aerosol.
The initial analysis done in 1999 showed relatively small releases. If two walls of a cask were penetrated, however, releases were six times higher than they were if one wall was penetrated and the HEDD was captured inside the cask.
United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority (UKAEA) Transport Emergency Arrangements
Terence D. Kelly; UKAEA-RadSafe, UK
RadSafe is a mutual aid transport emergency response scheme that provides support to the emergency services in the event of an incident involving the transport of radioactive material by road or rail in Great Britain. RadSafe has created a coordinated emergency response plan for industry - 3,000 emergency service personnel have been trained (first responders, health physicists, fire service) with consistent standards, and are provided with expert technical assistance.
RadSafe supports a communications hub with a 24-hour phone number and five response sites.
RadSafe conducts three levels of response: 1) Generic advice via phone, 2) In-person assistance, 3) Post-incident cleanup.
-----------------------------
CONCURRENT TECHNICAL SESSION
Analysis of Various Impact Events
Comparison of UF6 Packages Under Certification Test and Accident Conditions
Carlos Lopez; Sandia National Laboratories
Three packages have been approved by the NRC for uranium hexafluoride (UF6) transport.
Mr. Lopez's study calculated event tree probabilities of incidents, velocities needed to make an impact, and thermal analysis.
Probability of an accident = (route length) (historical accident data) (scenario probability) (speed probability)
Conclusion: There are a few branches of the event tree for the transportation of UF6 that could lead to accident conditions which exceed the regulatory conditions, but their probabilities are acceptably small.
Package Performance Study Status Update
Daniel Huang, NRC, Status of the Package Performance Study
NRC will conduct full scale tests of spent nuclear fuel casks under conservative estimates to demonstrate the robustness of casks and enhance public confidence in the design.
A demonstration test configuration of the rail transportation cask - a Transportation, Aging, and Disposal (TAD) concept canister - was approved by the NRC in June 2005.
DOE issued preliminary performance specifications for industry designs of the TAD in November 2006; the final in June 2007. TAD canister vendors submitted sample designs in 2007.
The NRC expects to receive applications for transportation certification of eight TAD canisters by Sept./Oct. 2008. The NRC could then issue a certificate of compliance in Oct. 2009. Contracts are to be awarded in November 2010, and performance demonstration tests will occur in late 2012 or early 2013. Tests and post analysis will take 11 months, and will include striking the body of a cask at a 90 degree angle with a 60 mile/hour train.
Germany performed drop tests on two casks. NRC staff expect to complete analyses of both CONSTOR and MHI casks in FY 2008 or 2009.
Demonstration tests are expected to cost about $11-15 million, and NRC is seeking funders.
-----------------------------
CONCURRENT TECHNICAL SESSION
Criticality and Shielding
IAEA Activities Related to Burn-up Credit
William Danker, International Atomic Energy Agency
200,000 metric tons of heavy metal are stored around the world. Long term storage is becoming a progressive reality - anticipate it could last 100 years or longer.
The 2007 IAEA General Conference was held in September in Vienna, and included more than 1,500 delegates from 100 member states. The Spent Fuel Management Unit of IAEA is known as B.3, and one of its goals is to address spent fuel performance assessment and research (SPAR).
Burn-up credits have to do with getting credit for the depletion of radioactivity of spent fuel through irradiation over time.
Implementation of the Burn-up Credit Approach for Transport and Storage Cask
Frederic Riou; TN International AREVA, France
Burn-up credit used to be based only on actinides; the advanced calculation now includes 9 actinides and up to 15 fission products. The minimum cooling period considered is two years.
Industry would like to expand the credit to include mixed oxide (MOX) from pressurized water reactors (PWR) and uranium dioxide (UO2) from boiling water reactors (BWR). Current consideration only goes to UO2 PWR.
Oct. 24 - OPENING PLENARY
DOE Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management (OCRWM)
Gary Lanthrum; DOE-OCRWM, Office of Logistics Management
Overall hazmat transportation volume in the U.S. is about equally split between the shipping modes of rail (111) and truck (114 - in billions of ton miles per year). Most short distances are covered by truck, whereas longer stretches often use rail. Most of the hazmat shipped across the U.S. takes the form of flammable/combustible liquids or gasses.
U.S. Transport Council (USTC)
David Blee, USTC
USTC is a global organization, founded in 2002 during the Yucca Mountain ratification debate and is comprised of 29 member companies. The mission of the organization includes: education, policy consensus, etc., and covers the Yucca Mountain project, WIPP, the Global Threat Reduction Initiative, and GNEP.
Transportation and the Nuclear Renaissance:
- A "renaissance" is already apparent in Finland, China, and other parts of Asia.
- In the U.S., 32 plants are on the drawing boards. Two at a plant in Texas.
- Transportation of nuclear materials would increase with the following projects: recycling facilities, mixed oxide (MOX) fuel facility, Yucca Mountain, interim storage.
- Anti-nuclear groups see transportation as a wedge issue to drum up concerns of safety. The safety record, however, is unparalleled.
A National Academies report recommended those responsible for nuclear transportation build a risk-based communications system. The Swedish version of the U.S. Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board (advisory board on the Yucca Mountain project) is not just technical, but also social. Open and transparent communication involving local communities is critical to gaining understanding and acceptance of nuclear projects. Facts as to safety and security are on the side of nuclear transportation.
The Nuclear Waste Policy Act requires DOE to contract with private industry to the fullest extent possible for transportation. USTC supports this, as well as another National Academies recommendation to potentially change the management of the Yucca Mountain project to that of a quasi-governmental or private organization, to take decision making somewhat out of the political realm.
Q&A
Lanthrum Comments - The runaway chlorine truck through Las Vegas got a lot of press. A Nevada member of Congress asked his community how they could let this happen, as if the community were the best body to determine what is the safest way to transport hazardous wastes in a national campaign. Those working in nuclear transportation need to communicate with affected communities, but also up through Congress.
There is a critical shortfall in funding for the Yucca Mountain project, but the transportation program and the Transportation External Coordination Working Group will continue to engage stakeholders. Money for hardware will not be available though. Having locals within a community become advocates is the best way to convince the public of a strong safety record.
Public Comment - There seems to be a mixed message in the Yucca Mountain environmental impact statements. They mention 53,000 safe shipments, but that 2 cancers may result. This statistic needs to be put into perspective with relative risks. Need to show what risks the alternatives to transporting the waste could produce as well.
Public Comment - Touting the unmatched safety standards for nuclear transportation is a double-edged sword. In a way, it shows the extreme levels of packaging and transportation safety and security that must go into them, therefore making the materials seem even more dangerous. Comparing safe statistics with other industries will only show how strict regulations are for nuclear, and create a bigger aura of danger around the material. Nuclear transporters shouldn't focus on risk, but rather on benefits.
-------------------------------
CONCURRENT TECHNICAL SESSION
Transport of Research Reactor Fuel and UF6
Transport of Depleted Uranium Hexafluoride (DUF6) Cylinders
George Taylor, Visionary Solutions
Visionary Solutions received a contract with DOE in 1999 to remove 5,952 cylinders of DUF6 (byproduct of enrichment process) from Oak Ridge to Paducah in Kentucky and Portsmouth in Ohio. The company finished the project three years ahead of schedule in December 2006. 4,975 total shipments were made.
DUF6 was transported in their existing, old, environmentally-degraded cylinders (in which they had been stored), but with overpacks when necessary.
Advanced communications transpired between DOE and Tennessee, Kentucky, and Ohio. The carrier worked with local officials to schedule shipments around population centers during high traffic rush hours, and around school bus hours. They also trained 450 first responders.
CVSA Level VI safety inspections were conducted on the transporting vehicles. 24/7 tracking was conducted through the Qualcomm and TRANSCOM online systems.
Lessons Learned: Early, pro-active cooperation with state authorities is effective in improving public acceptance of risks. Emergency response training must happen continually as turnover of employees is a factor, and quality drivers are a necessity.
Q&A
Is DUF6 more of a chemical danger than a radioactive danger?
- In a way. The transporters used Highway Route Controlled Quantities (HRCQ)-like procedures, as is done with certain other hazardous wastes.
DOT Comment: DOT role - Inspected cylinders before they left the facility and indeed before the shipping campaign even began. The most-degraded cylinders and least depleted or undeterminable uranium were sent in overpacks. These characteristics required HRCQ procedures, and it was decided to ship all loads the same way for simplicity.
Planning, Preparation, and Transport of the High-Enriched Uranium Spent Nuclear Fuel from Czech Republic to Russia Federation
Michael J. Tyacke; Idaho National Laboratory (INL)
The Russian Research Reactor Fuel Return (RRRFR) Program will be shipping 343 highly-enriched uranium spent nuclear fuel assemblies and 246 lowly-enriched uranium spent nuclear fuel assemblies in one shipment from the Nuclear Research Institute in Rez, Czech Republic to the Russian Federation. The shipment is expected to take place before the end of 2007.
Repatriation of VINCA RA Reactor Spent Fuel
Edward Bradley; International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
The VINCA Institute was the central waste storage and processing facility for Serbia and the former Yugoslavia. The IAEA signed a contract with Serbia in Sept. 2006 for cleanup, and the work is ongoing. So far, much of the nuclear material has been removed and there are plans to decontaminate and decommission the buildings when funding is acquired.
The project discovered 8,030 fuel elements, approx. 17 percent of which were highly-enriched uranium. Many elements were in the form of small, palm-sized packages.
A workshop on the Russian Research Reactor Fuel Return (RRRFR) project was held in October 2006, which resulted in an IAEA report on lessons learned. The report will be made available for future campaigns.
Oct. 25 - CONCURRENT TECHNICAL SESSION
Physical Protection Measures and Emergency Response
Transportation Aspects Associated with the Department of Energy's Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP) Program
Ken B. Sorenson; Sandia National Laboratories
Mr. Sorenson's study investigated heat load of fast reactor fuel over multiple recycles and evaluated those results in terms of impacts on transportation. He studied both metal and oxide fuel, and assumed reprocessing would perfectly separate out all transuranic wastes together.
After the first recycle in a fast reactor, the discharged inventory would cool for five years before additional recycling. The total heat load decreased significantly in five years, but increased slightly with each recycle. A 23 percent burn-up (or reduction) of transuranic waste occurred with each recycle.
Conclusions: The heat load increased by less than a factor of two out of five recycles. Plutonium 238 and Curium 244 isotopes dominated the heat production.
Oct. 26 - CONCURRENT TECHNICAL SESSION
Managing Safe Transport
Establishing an Integrated Packaging Program in a Multi-Corporate Environment
Paul T. Mann; DOE-National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)
The NNSA Defense Program's nuclear material packaging program works in a multi-corporate environment (providing funding to up to seven different organizations each year) in its mission to provide transportation packages (Type A and B certified RAM containers) when and where required for weapons' grade nuclear material. Although the focus of the group is on defense nuclear needs, it seeks to collaborate with other DOE offices with similar missions to eliminate duplication and help stretch funding. Other DOE programs with container responsibilities include the Office of Fissile Materials Disposition and the Office of EM.
Seven geographically-dispersed NNSA sites have independent corporate structures:
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California
Nevada Test Site
Los Alamos National Lab in New Mexico
Sandia National Lab in New Mexico
Pantex in Texas
Y-12 in Tennessee
Savannah River Site in South Carolina
Kansas City - non nuclear
A Packaging and Transportation Integrated Working Group has been established to identify lessons learned from across these seven sites.
A DOE-wide Secure Transportation Asset Advisory Board (STAAB) was also established and consists of top level managers from: EM, OCRWM, the Office of Nuclear Energy, etc. The Secure Transportation and Packaging Steering Committee supports the STAAB with special study groups.
Finally, the Nuclear Materials Disposition and Consolidation Coordination Committee works for integration among department offices on all nuclear materials issues.
----------------------------
CONCURRENT PANEL DISCUSSION
Stakeholder Interface Issues in Safety and Security
Kansas Experience with State-Federal Coordination on Nuclear Transportation
Frank Moussa, Administrator, Technical Hazards Division; Kansas Division of Emergency Management
Eighty percent of Kansas first responders are volunteer.
West Valley, New York shipments were scheduled to pass through Kansas in 2001, but were delayed after the Sept. 11 attacks. Training had taken place in August of that year, as well as town-hall meetings with local elected officials.
The shipments were rescheduled for 2003, which required re-training due to volunteer turnover. Town-hall meetings were convened again as well. DOE Office of EM trainers were very helpful in preparing the state.
The state's Emergency Operations Center (EOC) remained open to first responders and health physicists during the shipping campaign. The transmission of shipment locations every 15 minutes on TRANSCOM (online system) worked perfectly. The state did not require inspections at its border, or any kind of shadowing/escorting - just notification ahead of time for planning purposes.
Lessons Learned:
- The 2001 plan was more comprehensive than the 2003 version, and it ended up being the one used.
- FEMA got involved and made calls related to the shipments on open lines - concerns about safeguards information.
- The state received $25,000 for training and use of the EOC, but it ended up costing the state more than this, as much of the planning had to take place twice.
- Hospital training advocacy along the transportation corridor had occurred earlier, but was dropped in 2003 because of cost.
- Notifying regional staff ahead of time as to the shipment schedule (times, etc.) was beneficial.
Q&A
Does the governor routinely activate the EOC for hazmat shipments?
- No, but this shipment had visibility. It was more a gesture to reassure the public, as the shipment was less dangerous than other hazmat shipments that do not require activating the EOC.
New Mexico WIPP Transportation Experience
Anne deLain Clark, Coordinator, New Mexico Radioactive Waste Consultation Task Force; Department of Energy, Minerals, and Natural Resources
The Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in New Mexico and shipments of transuranic waste to it were originally quite controversial in the state. New Mexico did not want to be known as the country's dumping ground. It took a couple of decades, from the 1970s to 1999 before the first shipment reached WIPP.
Although Ms. Clark herself originally protested the facility, she grew to understand it was probably the safest solution to serve a real public need. The burial of transuranic waste occurs more than 2,000 feet underground in a salt bed at WIPP. The Carlsbad community nearest the WIPP facility supported the project for the boost it would bring to their economy with the technical expertise required, but the north strongly opposed it.
New Mexico and the Western Governors' Association negotiated strict rules on shipping, much stronger than even federal regulations and protocols on the matter, and brought those who opposed the site to the table for discussions. The site eventually opened in 1999 and has had tremendous success in the safety realm, both at the site and in transportation en-route.
The biggest recent challenge at WIPP has been deciding how best to mark the territory near the site so that future generations know what is located underground and handle development there appropriately.
|
