Waste Management Symposium - Packaging and Transportation
February 27, 28, March 1; Tucson, AZ
Perspectives and Practices in Packaging and Transportation
February 27, 2007
Transportation of Low-Level Waste (LLW) from Fernald, Ohio - Missouri's Lessons Learned
Jane Beetem; MO Dept. of Natural Resources; CSG-Midwest
In 2005 and 2006, over 2,000 shipments from Fernald traveled through Missouri.
Truck shipments traveled on I-70 and I-44 and passed through 5 major cities.
One accident – shipment rear-ended. Semi truck that hit it was totaled, shipping truck had very little damage (integrity held); no one was seriously hurt.
Lessons learned from campaigns:
- Earlier coordination – notice to states and emergency responder of shipment specifics (type, volume, etc).
- Route selection process improvements – selection should be based on shortest, quickest, lowest population routes. With this shipment campaign, however, it seemed that routes through MO were chosen based on avoidance of state fees, such as those in Iowa.
- Improved communication – States can give local insight into traffic, etc.
- Coordination of media contact
Q&A
Does a state need to be so heavily involved if shipments carry no actual risk?
- With this one yes, because it was a large shipping campaign with media attention.
Benchmarking Transportation Logistics Practices for Effective System Planning
Alex Thrower, Senior Policy Advisor; DOE-OCRWM Office of Logistics Mgmt.
Interim report out now for comment. Final out in a month.
Spent Nuclear Fuel (SNF) shipping campaigns have a 40-year record of excellence:
3,000 casks/2,400 metric tons domestically; 35,000 casks/85,000 TTU internationally.
Benchmarking is done to discover best practices.
Used internet to:
Learn basic benchmarking process of other government organizations (DoD, GAO)
Identify business partners
Identify experiences
Looked into existing successful campaigns – Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program (NNPP), Foreign Research Reactor (FRR)
Critical Business Practices:
Business Model: What factors drive success? – Mgmt structures, processes, and technology.
Loading and unloading at origin and destination sites
Turnaround times
Scheduling conflicts and delays – shipments not primary focus at sites.
Logistics managers interface with onsite preparedness and regulatory compliance.
Cask certifications and acceptance of waste for disposal require continuous tracking and quality assurance.
Build multidisciplinary matrix teams – contractors, technical, stakeholders.
Test and refine plans, equipment, and operations.
Integrate tracking and emergency technology.
Contract Mgmt/Outsourcing – of key importance due to statutory mandates to maximize private industry use.
Carrier services – shipping vehicles and drivers, containers, etc.
Mission critical assets and functions – primary interface and oversight must stay at federal level, as does stakeholder relations.
Contracting: Attention to detail – very best drivers, safety incentives. When deciding on number of contractors, weigh benefits of competition with consistency.
Stakeholder Involvement:
Trust and credibility
Focus on safety
Use training, demonstration, and exercise
Build on established relationships
Manage commitments to planning partners
Current and planned activities:
Building staff capabilities and expertise (staff rotations with NNPP).
Proposing demonstration projects to test operational readiness, emergency response (ER) tied to 180(c) funding.
Understand detail of performance-based logistics contracts.
Reviewing information products and services to ensure focus on safety.
Compare benchmark finding with current ORCWM plans.
Compare federal project benchmarks with commercial logistics trends and practices.
Identify future federal and commercial benchmarking partners.
Consider more detailed analysis with current partners – load, shipment planning, dynamic routing and consolidation, loading.
Understanding outsourcing.
Look at shipment practices for other hazardous materials, munitions.
Q&A
Exercises coordinated with Homeland Security (urban area security money)?
- Yes, to save money.
Monitoring driver performance part of contracts?
- Technologies will evolve and get cheaper for such monitoring.
Any ah-ha moments?
- How easy it was after he nailed down exactly what it was the program wanted to get from the report.
Transportation Packaging, Analysis, and Testing
February 28, 2007
Computational Modeling to Predict Waste Package Performance
Nawal K. Prinja, Technical Manager, Head of Profession – Civil & Structural Engineering; AMEC NNC (National Nuclear Corporation) - England
Computational models test:
Fire assessment (heat transfer analysis)
Impact and drop load assessment
Radionuclide release
4 slag pots contaminated with Pu-238. Had to transport to a LLW fill in England.
Developed a unique shipping package. Shell around pot with beams holding pot in middle.
Performed dynamic analysis – flat, edge, and corner drops.
Static Analysis
Modeling shows degrees of stress and locations on package. Can't visualize with actual test. Found that infill concrete was taking the brunt of the strain as they had hoped.
Heated package for 1 hour, cooled for 23. Found that package held heat and heat increased over 2-3 hours before decreasing.
Q&A
The equivalent to the NRC in Britain will accept computational modeling alone – without testing?
- Yes.
How long did it take to license the package?
- Project started in September 2006. Shipping now.
European Experience in Transport/Storage Cask for Vitrified Residues – TN81 (Switzerland) and TN 85 (Germany)
Camille Otton; TN International, AREVA - France
Evolution of burn-up of reprocessed spent fuel has led to vitrifying waste. TN International was tasked with transporting 28 canisters with a maximum thermal power of 56kw (2kw each). Their current design could only handle 40kw total.
3 countries with various authorities and technical experts were involved. Started in Germany, then Switzerland and France.
Performed thermal tests (800 C, 1472 F degrees for 30 minutes).
9 meter lateral drop tests - 4 (top, bottom, side, corner).
Leaktightness test on primary and secondary barriers – very low leak values.
Also puncture tested.
Two casks resulted – TN 81 (3 already stored in Switzerland, 6 more to be manufactured) and TN 85 (12 being manufactured, first delivered in Feb. 2007, first transport will happen in 2008). Minor adaptations required due to the interfaces with the storage sites and existing tools.
(TN 28VT transport casks used for Belgium, Netherlands, and Japan - who don't store canisters in casks, but in buildings.)
Many successful HLW train and truck shipments have been made around Europe by AREVA since the 1990s.
Q&A
What is the cost difference between casks?
- Not sure. Depends on whether it is only a transport cask or dual transport and storage cask.
Heat tests seemed low – should be at least 1000 degrees C, not 800.
- Only need to be compliant with IAEA standards. Completed additional tests for shipments to Japan, which required stricter standards.
Do you design and interface casks to fit with tools at sites?
- Yes.
Drop tests at 1/3 – any request to increase?
- No. But did complimentary tests for Japan.
Lessons Learned in the Development of a Small Light Weight Package for a Drum
Charles Temus; Packaging Technology, Inc. - AREVA
Used old fashioned hand calculations, then tested.
Simple and inexpensive 55 gallon drum – overpacks for type B and fissile materials.
N-55 USNRC Docket 71-9070
One of first packages to meet IAEA performance standards
Started in 1970s
Initial regulations focused on drop and puncture tests - now must meet crush test as well.
Shipped uranium oxide powder. Max enrichment – 1.2%. Max quantity – 650 pounds. Type A fissile material.
Encased drum in reinforced fiberglass liner, polyurethane foam, and sheet metal shell (with heavy duty latches) for shipping. Changed gasket material to fiberglass because foam would melt at the heat level – bolted on each side.
Tests:
Drop tested (free, crush, puncture). If dropped on a latch it would fail. Bolts added between latches for redundancy to be safer.
Fire test – foam burned quickly. But no combustibles; stayed together.
After fire, immersion in water to check for leakage (3 feet of water for 24 hours). Only a few drops of water found in drum.
50 foot immersion test. Resulted in 3 node buckling (if empty – if full, less). Still didn't lose closure; teaspoon of water inside.
Drum and tests are currently being reviewed by the NRC.
Q&A
How many units do you expect to make?
- 100 for this contract.
The Packaging and Transportation of FUTURIX-FTA Fuel Pins
Fred Yapuncich; AREVA Federal Services - USA
INL sponsored this work.
Payload consisted of four sodium bonded fast reactor fuel pins.
Packaging: TN-BGC 1
Regulatory Compliance: France (CEA) and USA (DOT, NRC)
Transport Logistics: Land and sea coordination
Package – inner stainless steel shell. A resin layer for neutron absorption. Outer stainless steel shell. Closure lid using bayonet system. Impact limiter plug. Aluminum frame.
Transported by ground from Idaho to the Port of Savannah – by ship to Cherbourg, France – and from there by ground transport to Avignon, France.
Tie down system engineered and studied (dry runs bring out common sense solutions to problems that might otherwise be overlooked).
Process began in July, 2005 – shipment ended in Sept. 2006.
14 months start to finish, although actual time in shipment lasted only one month.
Current Topics and Issues in US Packaging and Transportation
March 1, 2007
Understanding the Value of Stakeholder Collaboration from the Onset through all Phases of the Spent Fuel Transportation Project.
Alex Thrower, Office of Logistics Mgmt; DOE-OCRWM
Success in this project will require participation and cooperation from many stakeholders (feds, states/tribes, industry, special interest groups).
Strategic Plan for the Safe Transportation of SNF and HLW to Yucca Mountain: A Guide to Stakeholder Interactions.
Transportation topics of interest to stakeholders:
Routing
Emergency Response (ER) planning, training, and funding
Safeguards and security
Tribal interactions
Operational practices
Rail activities
DOE-OCRWM should have a draft National Transportation Plan for public comment later this year. Elements of the plan: requirements, infrastructure development, institutional outreach, operations.
Regional planning approach: CSG-Midwest, CSG-Northeast, WIEB, SSEB
Tribal government collaborative approach:
Recognition of sovereignty
Interaction on govt. to govt. basis
Directly funding tribes for ER and training under Section 180(c) of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act, as amended.
Compliance with DOE's American Indian and Alaska Native Tribal Government Policy
Proactively engaging tribes and facilitating discussions
TEC – Transportation External Coordination Working Group:
OCRWM co-chairs TEC with DOE's Office of Environmental Mgmt (EM).
TEC provides an opportunity for broad-based input and information exchange for stakeholders.
Conducts research and provides findings at semi-annual meetings.
Work accomplished through subject-specific topic groups that enable a small number of participants to focus intensively on key issues (rail, security, 180(c), routing, manual, tribal).
Website: http://www.tecworkinggroup.org/
Objectives in developing routing process:
Put into place a process that maximizes the ability of the public to understand transportation risks.
Allow the public to influence the identification of routes within their jurisdictional areas.
Section 180(c) of Nuclear Waste Policy Act (NWPA):
Requires DOE to provide funding and technical assistance to states and tribes for training public safety officials for safe, routine transportation and emergency preparedness.
Covers all modes of transport
Funding will come from the Nuclear Waste Fund
Worked with TEC Section 180(c) Topic Group to develop the proposed Section 180(c) policy grant application. The Office of Logistics Mgmt (OLM) is currently reviewing the policy before issuance in the Federal Register later this year.
Future Stakeholder Involvement:
Operational Readiness
Pilot project
Readiness review
Campaign planning
Emergency Preparedness
180(c) pilot project
Q&A
Why is this campaign so much more difficult/involved than Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program (NNPP) shipments?
- NNPP involves fewer shipments
- NNPP are national security shipments, so classified (no stakeholder involvement)
- But working with NNPP to learn best practices.
Comment: UK has found best outcome with stakeholder engagement when UK changes a decision based on stakeholder comments. That builds trust.
Clark County, Nevada's Assessment of Land Use Conflicts Resulting from Shipments to Yucca Mountain
Nathan Christiansen; Clark County, NV
Concern from Clark County about Amended Notice of Intent to Prepare an EIS for the Alignment, Construction, and Operation of a rail line.
Evaluation of land-use should identify current ownership and present anticipated future uses of the land.
Within a one mile impact corridor of the rail line near Las Vegas, growth has been tremendous between 2001 and 2006.
85% of land in NV is owned by the US govt. Undeveloped land is sometimes sold off at auction. The largest and longest land value increases have been seen recently (25,00-50,000/acre to 500,000/acre). Higher development densities occur as the value of land increases. Mixed-use densities exist near interstates/railways.
2004 – population near corridor about 86,000. In next few years expected to be upwards of about 1 million.
2006 land use assessed value, $33 billion.
DOE needs to identify these changes and their impacts. Clark County will continue to monitor.
Q&A
What are the actual impacts of transporting through Las Vegas?
- Social perceptions. A National Academy of Sciences report highlighted this.
What do you want out of this – money?
- I don't think so. Concern is for public safety.
- Irene Navis, Clark County: NWPA allows affected counties to look at impacts. There are risks associated with shipments on property values and tourism. Question is - Should shipments come through Las Vegas at all? DOE needs to take growth into consideration. Clark County wants to influence federal decisions to benefit their community.
Nye County concerned about shipments going through Las Vegas – the economic engine for NV. But if shipments go down Mina route for example and not through Las Vegas, would Clark County support shipments?
- Can't answer that.
Las Vegas in a desert; worries about water. Will there be a sustainable water supply to support this growth?
- Plan to build a pipeline from northern NV.
If Yucca Mountain is such a threat to the economy of Las Vegas, how do you explain this tremendous growth?
- Many residents are concerned (70% oppose Yucca Mountain). Many others don't know much about Yucca Mountain - project is still so far off.
Comment: DOE did a property assessment in the Yucca Mountain Environmental Impact Statement that doesn't agree with Clark County's interpretation.
Harmonization - Two Years of Transportation Regulation Lessons Learned (US SNF Shipment Experience by Rail)
Kurt Colborn, MHF Logistical Solutions
Mr. Colborn's presentation intended to counter the idea that the rail industry is not ready to handle radioactive waste freight. The greatest challenges are social and institutional.
Logistics/technical side largely in place, but do still need to design the rail car to meet American Association of Railroads' standards (locking and bracing, etc.) and need to know which routes will be chosen.
Representative Campaigns:
Commercial
Davis Besse Reactor Head
NPPD Cooper Plant Rotors
Fermi 2 MSRs
DOE
Spent Fuel, NNSA GTRI
All have proven that successful shipments are possible for class 7, like-weighted, etc. radioactive materials – as the SNF campaign will require. The commercial rail industry system is largely ready to support Yucca Mountain shipments.
 Return to Waste Management MENU page
Return to the Nuclear Waste Cleanup Menu Page
|
