ML20202G821
| ML20202G821 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 06/18/1986 |
| From: | Kerr G NRC OFFICE OF STATE PROGRAMS (OSP) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20202G804 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-WM-1 NUDOCS 8607160112 | |
| Download: ML20202G821 (18) | |
Text
.. -. - - _ _
TRANSPORTATION OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL G. Wayne Kerr, Director Office of State Programs U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Before the Nuclear Waste Policy Committee National Congrcss of American Indians ,
Albuquerque, New Mexico June 18, 1986 .
O D
e 0
4 8607160112 860710 PDR STPRG ESGGEN P DR -.
TRANSPORTATION OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL G. Wayne Kerr, Director Office of State Programs U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 It is indeed a pleasure to be here to participate in this important meeting of the National Congress of American Indians and to meet with your 1
members. I am especially pleased that I have the opportunity to discuss with you the subject of the transportation of radioactive materials.
Transportation of radioactive materials is a complicated matter partly because it is primarily regulated at the Federal level by two agencies, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission (NRC) and the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), and partly because of the numerous and detailed requirements needed to provide adequate safety for the many types, forms, and quantities of materials shipped. In this regard, the NRC and DOT 2
jointly sponsored in Chicago last summer a seminar on the regulatory aspects of the transportation of spent nuclear fuel. At the seminar, the National Congress of American Indians made an excellent presentation from the perspective of the Indian Tribes. I am here in part as a follow-up to that seminar and to further the relationship that we are attempting to build with the various Indian Tribes and your organization.
Today I will attempt to touch on only the major aspects of the subject rather than getting into any great detail. My remarks will cover the broad range of radioactive materials in transit, namely medical and industrial goods, low-level waste and spent fuel. I should add that the transportation of radioactive material generates considerable public concern as well as attention by officials at all levels of government when an event occurs, be it large or small. Although members of the NRC staff have attended a number of meetings organized by Indians primarily related to Nuclear Waste Policy Act issues, we still have have much to learn on the role of Indian Tribal governments in transportation issues. This discussion addresses the subject- ,
broadly with certain emphasis on States. This emphasis is a consequence of l the circumstance that, in many cases, States have been singled out in !
statutes related to transportation that are silent with respect to Tribes. l In addition, many States have an existing infrastructure that addresses this '
issue.
Background .
To provide some perspective concerning radioactive materials shipments, the following data may be of interest. About 500 billion packages of all types of commodities are " shipped in the United States each year.
Approximately 100 million (0.02%) of the total estimated shipments involve every kind of hazardous material, such as flammables, explosives, poisons, corrosives and radioactive material. There are an estimated 2 million l
l l
l .. -- -- . .- - . .- . .- .
annual shipments of radioactive materials which contain an average of 1.4 packages per shipment. This is a total of 2.8 million packages shipped annually which contain quantities ranging from very small to quite large (excluding DOE shipments of radioactive materials and commercial spent nuclear fuel shipments).
These 2.8 million packages are from a variety of sources -- medical (62.2%), industrial (7.6%), nuclear power plants (4.1%), waste. (6.5%), and other sources (19.5%). Based on a measure of the radioactivity shipped rather than number of shipments, the percentages are medical (34.3%),
industrial (63.1%), nuclear power plants (0.7%), waste (1.5%) and other sources (0.4%). The medical uses of radioactive material primarily involve administering radiopharmaceuticals for various procedures and the use of large radiation sources for treatment of cancer. The radiopharmaceuticals are often shipped to hospitals from the supplier by means of air transportation. Since they consist mainly of short-lived materials, hospitals need to be supplied weekly. Industrial uses of radioactive materials include the well-logging industry, the radiography industry and various gauging sources for measuring and controlling thickness, density and fluid level. Industrial sources are primarily shipped by air and surface transport. Waste shipments of radioactive material come from most users and are usually shipped by surface transport to commercial low-level waste disposal sites.
In addition to these shipments, there were an average of 24 commercial spent nuclear fuel assemblies per year shipped during the 1981 and 1982 period that the above estimates were made. In terms of total radioactivity for this time period, the 24 shipments of spent fuel assemblies accounted for about 6 million curies per year compared to 9 million curies per year for the other 2.8 million packages. The number of shipments and activity of spent nuclear fuel has increased significantly since 1982 because of the removal of spent fuel from the former reprocessing facility at West Valley, New York and shipments to and from the General Electric storage facility in Morris, Illinois. ;
The States are playing an increasingly important role in the trans-portation of radioactive material. The 28 Agreement States have adopted, regulations for intrastate transportation of radioactive material. These i regulations require shippers to conform to the packaging, labelling and l
- marking requirements of DOT for interstate transportation. Many States have ,
also formally adopted D0T regulations and apply the requirements to both l intrastate and interstate transportation under contracts with DOT whereby States exercise surveillance.
Regulatory Authorities The packaging and transporting of radioactive materials is regulated by the NRC, the D0T, the Postal. Service, and the individual States. Under the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act of 1974, the DOT is authorized to regulate the transportation of hazardous materials in commerce including (
requirements on safety in packaging, shipping, carriage, stowage, storage, I and handling of all radioactive materials. The legislation permits State regulation of the transportation of radioactive materials. Any State C_ - -- - -
i
' ' I i
which is inconsistent with the Act or DOT regulations is requirement
! preempted. A State may apply to DOT to relinquish preemption if the State requirement affords equal or greater protection than the Federal one, and i
does not unreasonably burden conenerce, The Act does not discuss Indian Tribes nor, as far as we know, is there any legislative history of the Act that deals with Indian Tribes.
The Postal Service regulates shipment of radioactive materials by mail.
Where intrastate transport of the material is not covered by the NRC, D0T or the Postal Service, it comes under the authority of the States.
I j Radioactive Material Packaging
.The regulatory jurisdictions of NRC and D0T overlap with respect to To safety in the transportation of certain kinds of radioactive materials.
avoid duplication, the two agencies have entered into a Memorandum of Understanding, by which DOT regulates packaging, the labeling of packages, and the conditions of carriage, while NRC reviews and approves package and for the larger quantities of designs for fissionable material In radioactive material and regulates private carriage by its licensees..
effect, this means that DOT is primarily concerned with regulation of packaging for smaller quantities of radioactive materials, vehicles and the process of transport; and NRC is primarily concerned with approving certain l
types of package designs.
J
! Material In Transit As mentioned earlier, many States have entered into surveillance contracts with D0T for the inspection of radioactive material shipments.
The amount of DOT inspection is quite limited. NRC has cooperative programs i with some States with respect to inspections of radioactive material transportation. Both Washington and South Carolina regulate a low-level radioactive waste burial site and both States maintain on-site State compliance with inspectors who check incoming waste shipments for regulations. In 1982 memoranda of understanding (MOUs) became effective between NRC and the State of Washington and South Carolina relating to the use of third party inspection data in transportation enforcement cases. ,
' As a result of these MOUs, the NRC uses the information' gathered by the State inspectors in enforcement cases against NRC licensees. While efforts are made to avoid duplication and excessive action against a shipper for the same violation, these MOUs do not preclude dual actions, where appropriate.
Since the passage of the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act of 1980 and development of interstate compacts to provide for low-level waste disposal capacity of compact regions, host States have also viewed the i
proper transportation of waste shipments originating from each State to be a responsibility of the generator State. In response to the States' desire
' for increased surveillance' of waste shipments and to facilitate their implementation of the Low-level Radioactive Waste Policy Act, NRC has developed an MOU which would permit a State.to inspect low-level radioactive waste packaging and shipping activities on the premises of certain NRC j
. _4_
licensees. Two years ago, Illinois became the first State to sign this type of MOU. We are anticipating more interest by other States and are presently negotiating with Pennsylvania, Virginia and Ohio. The whole process has been given impetus by the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act Amendments of 1985 which included Congressional consent of 7 interstate compacts covering 35 States. Additional compacts are expected.
For spent nuclear fuel shipments, NRC has been conducting compliance assurance inspections of many of the individual shipments in recent campaigns. These inspections are made prior to initiation of a campaign,The at the time of a shipment departure and upon its arrival at destination.
major focus of inspection efforts is directed to inspection of the adequacy of a licensee's program for packaging and transportation compliance assurance. DOT and the States sometimes inspect primarily with regard to compliance assurance requirements applicable to the carriers and the safety conditions of the transport vehicle. For some States, inspections include additional independent surveys of the radiation and contamination levels of the cask and vehicle. Two States that have been active are Illinois and New York.
Routing In some cases, local municipalities and bridge, tunnel, and turnpike authorities place restrictions on transporting radioactive material shipments at specified periods of the day and over certain roadways and sections of the route. Safety in transportation does not depend on special routing although DOT has published a highway routing rule which requires carriers to operate on routes that minimize radiological risk. This rule designates the Interstate highway system as the preferred route for specified large quantity shipments of radioactive material, such as spent nuclear fuel. States and Indian Tribes which have police powers to regulate and enforce highway routing requirements within their lands are authorized to designate alternate routes which provide equivalent safety. State and Indian actions must not be inconsistent with DOT regulations.
When DOT's notice of proposed rulemaking was published, several Indian organizations expressed a concern that the proposed rule failed to recognize "the unique legal status of Indian tribal governments and tribally-owned fands." They believed that Indian tribes are quasi-sovereign governments
. possessing rights of self-government under the terms of various treaties with th'e Federal Government. Such organizations maintained that Indian tribes have the same prerogative as State governments to designate preferred routes for large quantity radioactive materials across tribal lands. In its final rulemaking, DOT stated that the applicability of the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act, which is the basis of the routing rule, to Indian tribal lands would depend on the specific facts and the laws involved. However, D0T did recognize the special status of Indian tribal governments in the Federal. system. Accordingly, the final routing rule ,
allows Indian tribal governments to exercise routing authority in a similar i manner as provided for the State governments. This was accomplished by including appropriate Indian tribal authorities in the definition of " State routing agency," namely those with police powers to regulate and enforce highway routing requirements within their lands.
i
- y ,e , - v ,-
NRC licensees planning to ship spent nuclear fuel are required to
' submit for safeguards purposes proposed routes for such shipments to the NRC staff for approval prior to the first use of a given route. Once approved, the same route may be utilized for additional shipments in a proposed series i
of shipments without further approval of the route provided that the NRC is notified in advance of each shipment. These routes follow the Interstate system as far as practicable, or the State or Indian Tribe designated alternate route. NRC routinely publishes the routes that have been approved. ,
Notifications According to law, NRC was required to promulgate regulations providing for timely notification to States prior to transportion of law nuclear waste to, 3
The did not require 4
through or across the boundaries of those States. Requirements apply to shipments that the Indian Tribes be notified.
large quantities of radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel. Notification must be sent, in writing, to the Governor or Governor's designee at least seven days in advance of each shipment. Schedule information with respectA to spent nuclear fuel must be protected against unauthorized disclosure.
study on the effectiveness of the advance notification system indicates that shipment awareness and the States thought the procedures increased Department of Energy is not facilitated emergency planning. The U. S.
required to make such notifications on their shipments.
Emergency Response l
l NRC's policy statement on emergency response for transportation accidents asserts that State government is responsible for assuming control
.' of the accident scene to protect the health and safety of the public because the States have the primary responsibility for protecting the health and safety of the citizens from public hazards. The role of NRC with respect to j
the State response to such accidents is limited primarily to an advisory-l one. In cases of theft or sabotage, the Federal Bureau of Investigation may follow through in terms of investigation and recovery in certain cases, e.g., spent nuclear fuel. For all cases, State and local police are immedi-ate responders. The situation for Indian reservations was not specifically addressed in the policy statement. It is not clear howinvolving Tribes and States hazardous traditionally respond to transportation accidents materials on highways traversing tribal lands.
I The Federal Emergency Management Agency has prepared a guidance 4
document for developing State and local radiological emergency respense plans and preparedness for transportation accidents where organizational responsibilities of State and local governments are laid out. Coordination of Federal agencies is given in the Federal Radiological Emergency Response the U. S.
Plan. Federal agencies that offer response resources are:
Department of Energy for radiological monitoring and assessment functions Environmental until emergency conditions have subsided; and the U. S.
Protection Agency for continuing the DOE role after the emergency. The j
U. S. Coast Guard may also become involved for transportation accidents in coastal or inland navigable waterways. The DOT does not provide radio-i i
logical expertise but offers assistance and advice regarding transportation The role of resources needed to support emergency response organizations.
localities is limited to being first responders, either by police or fire departments. The Joint Nuclear Accident Coordinating Center (JNACC) of coordinating response to Department of Defense is responsible for military-related transport accidents which may involve specialized teams.
Areas of Concern to States, Localities, and Indian Tribes A number of concerns have been raised by State, Indian and local government representatives.* NRC staff understanding of the circumstances leading to these concerns varies and we are considering how to address these issues. Many of the views expressed below are drawn from the NRC/ DOT sponsored seminar regarding the regulatory aspects of the transportation At that meeting of spent nuclear fuel which was held in Chicago last summer.
12 Indian Tribes were represented as well as the National Congress of --
American Indians. Discussion groups focused on three main issues routing, inspections and emergency preparedness. Later in the year, the 19-21, 1985 Department of Energy sponsored a. workshop in Atlanta, November which dealt primarily with transportation issues related to the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982.
o Packaging Concern among the workshop participants appeared to be limited to high-level radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel shipments, where the concern relates to cask integrity under postulated accidents; performance testing versus actual testing; and the use by DOE of casks that are not certified by NRC. For the issue of cask integrity, NRC has ongoing a study with the objective to determine the performance of licensed casks under various types of realistic accidents and their frequency thatThe might occur report is during shipments of spent fuel both by rail and highway.
expected to be published this sumer.
o Inspections Workshop participants expressed concern that there are not enough shipments, inspections especially for waste and spent nuclear fuel Uniformity in procedures and instrumentation was advocated. There appears to be a need to improve the coordination among local, State, Indian and concern, Funding priorities are of Federal enforcement officials.
especially in relationship to programs dealing with non-radioactive hazardous materials.
Amendments to the Hazardous Materials Transportation. Act required the DOT and FEMA to evaluate hazardous materials training and planning and submit a report to Congress on their findings. The draft report concludes that significant training in hazardous materials compliance, enforcement, and response is occurring riationwide. Nevertheless, a requirement remains for continued training at present or increased levels to reach a greater share of the target audiences. The DOT and FEMA shall be making separate funding recommendations on this subject to Congress when the Act is reauthorized this year.
o Routing A number of parties at the workshops were not content with the DOT highway routing rule. Although 10 States (but no Indian Tribe) have designated routes that are alternatives to the DOT approved Interstate system, some States are still in the process and experiencing difficulty in designating an alternative route and supporting their choice. To have a defensible choice, they believe they need the best source of information from the public and private sectors and Federal certification of the State or Tribal alternate route that is chosen. The Indians were concerned that they are not consulted by NRC for routing of safeguarded shipments.
Some States believe that there should be a routing rule for rail shipments, which allows State designation of alternates similar to the DOT highway routing rule.
The States, Tribes, and localities are concerned that they may become corridors for spent nuclear fuel transportation to the high-level waste repositories and the monitored retrievable storage facility as a result of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act. As a consequence, there will be a large number of spent nuclear fuel shipments by highway and rail passing through their jurisdictions.
o Notifications The main concern of the States is that there is no requirement for DOE to provide notification of its spent nuclear fuel shipments. Since the threat is perceived by the public to be similar regardless of ownership, the States believe that DOE should follow the same procedural notification requirements as NRC licensees. Some States believe that the 7 day 4
notification requirement by NRC licensees is too short for purposes of public awar.eness and emergency purposes. Tribes are concerned that they are not currently notified since they were omitted in the law.
o Emergency Response Plans and Preparedness States Tribes and localities believe both training and funding is inadequate in spite of the programs offered by FEMA and DOE. They believe that generic guidance is needed for plans and preparedness and that there is confusion in the Federal regulations. They believe that emergency prepared-ness functions for all radioactive materials should be integrated into all hazardous materials emergency plans and preparedness. Timeliness of cleanup and cost recovery is uncertain. The Trioes are concerned that they are neither trained nor receive funds. Furthermore, Indian rep.resentatives have indicated that there are jurisdictional problems in that some States will not respond to transportation emergencies on Indian reservations.
OTA Transportation Studies In light of Congressional recognition that there is confusion over how safe the transportation process of hazardous materials ought to be, the 1
~ - - - - - . . - , - - . _ .l
Senate Comittee on Comerce, Science, and Transportation requested the Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) to undertake a study of the trans-portation of hazardousState materials. A special report, " Transportation of Hazardous Materials:
and Local Activities," was published in March 1986. This report sumarizes Federal programs and identifies three major areas of State and local government concern: prevention and enforcement planning and data emergency response and training, and activities, gathering. A second report which is due out soon outlines related issues, describes methods by which jurisdictions are responding td them, and documents the concerns that-the Federal Government could address.
NRC Actions To more fully understand the institutional relationships and problems which are associated with present spent fuel shipments or future waste shipments under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, NRC has a study The ongoing to survey and evaluate the West Valley spent fuel shipments. Also, final report of this two and one half year study is due this sumer.
we are beginning to explore with the National Congress of American Indians and others the nature of the interaction among the Federal Government, the Tribes regarding transportation on routes across States and Indian reservations and the impacts of these shipments. We are trying to learn how emergency responses to accidents are made on Tribal land and what the best approach should be. We in NRC are attempting to gain a better understanding We are trying of the Tribal views and ways to accomodate their concerns. 24, 1983, to implement President Reagan's Indian Policy Statement of January that Tribal governments, like State and local governments, are more aware of the needs and desires of their citizens than is the Federal Government and, should therefore, have the primary responsibility for meeting those needs.
O e
C i
w -
, ,--,,y-,-,
@L I
1 4
TRANSPORTATION OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL
! G. Wayne Kerr, Director Office of State Programs U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Before the Nuclear Waste Policy Comittee National Congress of American Indians Albuquerque, New Mexico June 18, 1986 .
e 9
e O
T a
-~rmwm s , re- - -
pm-- ----w m g-- y ,,y y,w.-- m-,,--y ,.
,. - _ ., y -- ,,----+p-- p- wmn- y e- m w m4 -, - + -
9
4
'l TRANSPORTATION OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL G. Wayne Kerr, Director
. Office of State Programs U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Washington, DC 20555 I It is indeed a pleasure to be here to participate ir this important
! meeting of the National Congress of American Indians and to meet with your members. I am especially pleased that I have the or,ortunity to discuss with you the subject of the transportation of radioactive materials.
Transportation of radioactive materials is a complicated matter partly because it is primarily regulated at the Federal level by two agencies, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission (NRC) and the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), and partly becau:e of the numerous and detailed
- l. requirements needed to provide adequate safety for the many types, forms,
) and quantities of materials shipped. In this regard, the NRC and DOT
' jointly sponsored in Chicago last sumer a seminar on the regulatory aspects
! of the transportation of spent nuclear. fuel. At the seminar, the National i Congress of American Indians made an excellent presentation from the i
perspective of the Indian Tribes. I am here in part as a follow-up to that i
seminar and to further the relationship that we are attempting to build with the various Indian Tribes and ycur organization.
Today I will attempt to touch on only the major aspects of the subject i rather than getting into any great detail. My remarks will cover the broad range of radioactive materials in transit, namely medical and industrial goods, low-level waste and spent fuel. I should add that the transportation of radioactive material generates considerable public concern as well as 1 attention by officials at all levels of government when an event occurs, be it large or small. Although members of the NRC staff have attended a number j of meetings organized by Indians primarily related to Nuclear Waste Policy
- Act issues, we still have have much to learn on the role of Indian Tribal
- governments in transportation issues. This discussion addresses the subject.
broadly with certain emphasis on States. This emphasis is a consequence of the circumstance that, in many cases, States have been singled out in statutes. related to transportation that are silent with respect to Tribes.
In addition, many States have an existing infrastructure that addresses this issue.
~
Background .
. To provide some perspective concerning radioactive materials shipments, the following data may be of interest. About 500 billion packages of all ,
types of comodities are ' shipped in the United States each year.
Approximately 100 million (0.02%)-of the total estimated shipments involve every kind of hazardous material, such as flamables, explosives, poisons,
- corrosives and radioactive material. There are an estimated 2 million i
i l
,_.__,...---..,.._,,.,_,,,,,_,___.,___,y_
.g.
annual shipments of radioactive materials which contain an average of 1.4 packages per shipment. This is a total of 2.8 million packages shipped annually which contain quantities ranging from very small to quite large (excluding DOE shipments of radioactive materials and commercial spent nuclear fuel shipments).
These 2.8 million packages are from a variety of sources -- medical (62.2%), industrial (7.6%), nuclear power plants (4.1%), waste. (6.5%), and other sources (19.5%). Based on a measure of the radioactivity shipped rather than number of shipments, the percentages are medical (34.3%),
industrial (63.1%), nuclear power plants (0.7%), waste (1.5%) and other sources (0.4%). The medical uses of radioactive material primarily involve administering radiopharmaceuticals for various procedures and the use of large radiation sources for treatment of car.cer. The radiopharmaceuticals are often shipped to hospitals from the supplier by means of air transportation. Since they consist mainly of short-lived materials, hospitals need to be supplied weekly. Industrial uses of radioactive materials include the well-logging industry, the radiography industry and various gauging sources for measuring and controlling thickness, density and fluid level. Industrial sources are primarily shipped by air and surface transport. Waste shipments of radioactive material come from most users and are usually shipped by surface transport to commercial low-level waste disposal sites.
- In addition to these shipments, there were an average of 24 commercial spent nuclear fuel assemblies per year shipped during the 1981 and 1982 period that the above estimates were made. In terms of total radioactivity for this time period, the 24 shipments of spent fuel assemblies accounted for about 6 million curies per year compared to 9 million curies per year for the other 2.8 million packages. The number of shipments and activity of spent nuclear fuel has increased significantly since 1982 because of the removal of spent fuel from the former reprocessing facility at West Valley, New York arid shipments to and from the General Electric storage facility in Morris, Illinois.
The States are playing an increasingly important role in the trans-portation of radioactive material. The 28 Agreement States have adopted regulations for intrastate transportation of radioactive material. These regulations require shippers to conform to the packaging, labelling and marking requirements of DOT for interstate transportation. Many States have also formally adopted DOT regulations and apply the requirements to both intrastate and interstate transportation under contracts with DOT whereby States exercise surveillance.
Regulatory Authorities
! The packaging and transporting of radioactive materials is regulated by the NRC, the DOT, the Postal Service, and the individual States. Under the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act of 1974, the DOT is authorized to regulate the transportation of hazardous materials in commerce including requirements on safety in packaging, shipping, carriage, stowage, storage, and handling of all radioactive materials. The legislation permits State regulation ,of the transportation of radioactive materials. Any State
1 ,
requirement which is inconsistent with the Act or DOT regulations is preempted. A State may apply to DOT to relinquish preemption if the State 1
requirement affords equal or greater protection than the Federal one, and i does not unreasonably burden comerce. The Act does not discuss Indian l Tribes nor, as far as we know, is there any legislative history of the Act j that deals with Indian Tribes. 1 The Postal Service regulates shipment of radioactive materials by mail. l 1
Where intrastate transport of the material is not covered by the NRC, D0T or the Postal Service, it con'es under the authority of the States.
Radioactive Material Packaging i The regulatory jurisdictions of NRC and DOT overlap with respect to To safety in the transportation of certain kinds of radioactive materials.
avoid duplication, the two agencies have entered into a Memorandum of Understanding, by which DOT regulates packaging, the labeling of packages, i i
and the conditions of carriage, while NRC reviews and approves package designs for fissionable material and for the larger quantities of In l
l radioactive material and regulates private carriage by its licensees. i effect, this means that DOT is primarily concerned with regulation of '
packaging for smaller quantities of radioactive materials, vehicles and the i process of transport; and NRC is primarily concerned with approving certain types of package designs.
Material In Transit s
j As mentioned earlier, many States have entered into surveillance contracts with D0T for the inspection of radioactive material shipments.
l i The amount of DOT inspection is quite limited. NRC has cooperative programs l with some States with respect to inspections of radioactive material transportation. Both Washington and South Carolina regulate a low-level radioactive waste burial site and both States maintaincompliance on-site State with inspectors who check incoming waste shlpments for l
j ;
regulations. In 1982 memoranda of understanding (MOUs) became effective '
between NRC and the State of Washington and South Carolina relating to the use of third party inspection data in transportation enforcement cases. l l
l
' As a result of these MOUs, the NRC uses the information gathered by th~e State inspe: tors in enforcement cases against NRC licensees. While efforts l
l are made to avoid duplication and excessive action against a shipper for the i 2
same violation, these MOUs do not preclude dual actions, where appropriate.
Since the passage of the low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act of 1980 and development of interstate compacts to provide for low-level waste disposal capacity of compact regions, host States have also viewed the proper transportation of waste shipments originating from each State to be a l
responsibility of the generator State. In response to the States' desire for increased surveillancer of waste shipments and to facilitate their implementation of the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Pol'cy Act, NRC has developed an MOU which would permit a State to inspect low-level radioactive waste packaging and shipping activities on the premises of certain NRC i !
4 licensees. Two years ago, Illinois became the first State to sign this type of M00. We are anticipating more interest by other States and are presently negotiating with Pennsylvania, Virginia and Ohio. The whole process has 4
been given impetus by the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act Amendments of 1985 which included Congressional consent of 7 interstate compacts covering 35 States. Additional compacts are expected.
For spent nuclear fuel shipments, NRC has been conducting compliance assurance inspections of many of the individual shipments in recent campaigns. These inspections are made prior to initiation of a campaign, at the time of a shipment departure and upon its arrival at destination. The l major focus of inspection efforts is directed to inspection of the adequacy l j
of a licensee's program for packaging and transportation compliance l
- assurance. DOT and the States sometimes inspect primarily with regard to compliance assurance requirements applicable to the carriers and the safety conditions of the transport vehicle. For some States, inspections include additional independent surveys of the radiation and contamination levels of l
- the cask and vehicle. Two States that have been active are Illinois and New
! York.
Routing In some cases, local municipalities and bridge, tunnel, and turnpike authorities place restrictions on transporting radioactive material shipments at specified periods of the day and over certain roadways and sections of the route. Safety in transportation does not depend on special routing although 00T has published a highway routing rule which requires carriers to operate on routes that minimize radiological risk. This rule 4
- designates the Interstate highway system as the preferred route for specified large quantity shipments of radioactive material, such as spent nuclear fuel. States and Indian Tribes which have police powers to regulate and enforce highway routing requirements within their lands are authorized to designate alternate routes which provide equivalent safety. State and 1
Indian actions must not be. inconsistent with DOT regulations.
l When DOT's notice of proposed rulemaking was published, several Indian 4 organizations expressed a concern that the proposed rule failed to recognize ,
j "the unique legal status of Indian tribal governments and tribally-ownea lands." They believed that Indian tribes are quasi-sovereign governments possessing rights of self-government under the terms of various treaties with the Federal Government. Such organizations maintained that Indian i
i i
tribes have the same prerogative as State governments to designate preferred routes for large quantity radioactive materials across tribal lands. In its ;
i final rulemaking, DOT stated that the applicability of the Hazardous l
- Materials Transportation Act, which is the basis of. the ' routing rule, to i
Indian tribal lands would depend on the specific facts and the laws involved. However, DOT did recognize the special status of Indian tribal governments in the Federal. system. Accordingly, the final routing rule allows Indian tr bal governments to exercise routing authority in a similar manner as provided for the State governments. This was accomplished by l
including appropriate Indian tribal authorities in the definition of " State routing agency," namely those with police powers to regulate and enforce highway routing requirements within their lands.
j
NRC licensees planning to ship spent nuclear fuel are required to submit for safeguards purposes proposed routes for such shipments to the NRC Once approved,
' staff for approval prior to the first use of a given route.
the same route may be utilized for additional shipments in a proposed series of shipments without further approval of the route provided that the NRC is l
notified in advance of each shipment. These routes follow the Interstate system as far as practicable, or the State or Indian Tribe designated alternate route. NRC routinely publishes the routes that have been j approved. ,
j Notifications f .According to law, NRC was required to promulgate regulations providing for timely notification to States prior to transportion The of law nuclear waste did not to, require
! through or across the boundaries of those States. Requirements apply to shipments o that the Indian Tribes be notified.
large quantities of radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel. Notification must be sent, in writing, to the Governor or Governor's designee at lent seven days in advance of each shipment. Schedule information with respectA
! 1 l
to spent nuclear fuel must be protected against unauthorized disclosure.
study on the effectiveness of the advance notification systemawareness indicates that and thought the procedures increased shipment the States facilitated emergency planning. The U. S. Department of Energy is not required to make such notifications on their shipments.
Emergency Response l
?
NRC's policy statement on emergency response .for transportation accidents asserts that State government is responsible for assuming control i
i of the accident scene to protect the health and safety of the public because the States have the primary responsibility for protecting the health and safety of t;he citizens from public hazards. The role of NRC with respect to i
l the State response to such accidents is limited primarily to an advisory-l one. In cases of theft or sabotage, the Federal Bureau of Investigation may follow through in terms of investigation and recovery in certain cases, 4
For all cases, State and local police are immedi-e.g., spent ate responders. nuclear fuel.The situation for Indian reservations was not specifically addressed in the policy statement. It is not clear how Tribes and States traditionally respond to transportation accidents involving hazardous materials on highways traversing tribal lands.
I The Federal Emergency Management Agency has prepared a guidance document for developing State and local radiological emergency response i
plans and- preparedness for transportation accidents where organizational responsibilities of State and local governments are laid out. Coordination l
of Federal agencies is given in the Federal Radiological Emergency Response U. S.
Federal agencies that offer response resources are: the Plan.
Department of Energy for rddiological monitoring and assessment functions emergency conditions have subsided; and the U. S. Environmental until Protection Agency for continuing the DOE role after the emergency. The
' O. S. Coast Guard may also become involved for transportation accidents in coastal or inland navigable waterways. The DOT does not provide radio-4
+
1
, , . - _ _ _ _ , - - , _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ , . - . - . _ , . . _ _ , . _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . ~ . - --
logical expertise but offers assistance and advice regarding transportation The role of resources needed to support emergency response organizations.
localities is limited to being first responders, either by police or fire departments. The Joint Nuclear Accident Coordinating Center response (JNACC) of to is responsible for coordinating Department of Defense military-related transport accidents which may involve specialized teams.
Areas of Concern to States, Localities, and Indian Tribes A number of concerns, have been raised by State, Indian and local NRC staff understanding of the circumstances government representatives. leading to these concerns varies and we are co issues. Many of the views expressed below are drawn from the NRC/ DOT sponsored seminar regarding the regulatory aspects of theAttransportation that meeting of spent nuclear fuel which was held in Chicago last summer.the as National Congress of 12 Indian Tribes were represented as well --
American Indians. Discussion groups focused on three main issues Later in the year, the routing, inspections and emergency preparedness. 19-21, 1985 Department of Energy sponsored a workshop in Atlanta, November which dealt primarily with transportation issues related to the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982.
o Packaging Concern among the workshop participants appeared to be limited to high-level radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel shipments, where the concern relates to cask integrity under postulated accidents; performance testing versus actual testing; and the use by DOE of casks that are not certified by NRC. For the issue of cask integrity, NRC has ongoing a study with the objective to determine the performance of licensed casks under various types of realistic accidents and their frequency thatThe might occur report is during shipments of spent fuel both by rail and highway.
expected to be published this summer, o Inspections Workshop participants expressed concern that there fuel are not enough shipments.
inspections especially for waste and spent nuclear There appears Uniformity in procedures and instrumentation was advocated. Indian ar.d to be a need to improve the coordination among local, State, of concern, Funding priorities are Federal enforcement officials. dealing with non-radioactive especially in relationship to programs hazardous materials.
Amendments to the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act required the D0T and FEMA to evaluate hazardous materials The training draftand planning report and concludes
' submit a report to Congress on their findings.
that significant training ,in hazardous materials compliance, Nevertheless, enforcement, a requirement remains and response is occurring nationwide.
for continued training at present or increased levels to reach a greater share of the target audiences. The DOT and FEMA shall be making separate funding recommendations on this subject to Congress when the Act is reauthorized this year.
7- l
, l l
o Routing A number of parties at the workshops were not content with the DOT highway routing rule. Although 10 States (but no Indian Tribe) have designated routes that are alternatives to the DOT approved Interstate system, some States are still in the process and experiencing difficulty in designating an alternative route and supporting their choice. To have a defensible choice, they believe they need the best source of information from the public and private sectors and Federal certification of the State or Tribal alternate route that is chosen. The Indians were concerned that they are not consulted by NRC for routing of safeguarded shipments.
Some States believe that there should be a routing rule for rail shipments, which allows State designation of alternates similar to the DOT highway routing rule.
The States, Tribes, and localities are concerned that they may become corridors for spent nuclear fuel transportation to the high-level waste repositories and the monitored retrievable storage facility as a result of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act. As a consequence, there will be a large number of spent nuclear fuel shipments by highway and rail passing through their jurisdictions.
o Notifications The main concern of the States is that there is no requirement for DOE to provide notification of its spent nuclear fuel shipments. Since the threat is perceived by the public to be similar regardless of ownership, the States believe that DOE should follow the same procedural notification requirements as NRC licensees. Some States believe that the 7 day notification requirement by NRC licensees is too short for purposes of public awar.eness and emergency purposes. Tribes are concerned that they are not currently notified since they were omitted in the law.
o Emergency Response Plans and Preparedness States, Tribes and localities believe both training and funding is inadequate in spite of the programs offered by FEMA and DOE. They believe that generic guidance is needed for plans and preparedness and that there is confusion in the Federal regulations. They believe that emergency prepared-ness functions for all radioactive materials should be integrated into all hazardous materials emergency plans and preparedness. Timeliness of cleanup and cost recovery is uncertain. The Tribes are concerned that they are neither trained nor receive funds. Furthermore, Indian representatives have indicated that there are jurisdictional problems in that some States will not respond to transportation emergencies on Indian reservations. !
OTA Transportation Studies j In light of Congressional recognition that there is confusion over.how safe the transportation process of hazardous materials ought to be, the I
1 1
Senate Comittee on Comerce, Science, and Transportation requested the Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) to undertake a study of the trans-A special report, " Transportation of portation of hazardous materials. State and Local Activities," was published in March Hazardous Materials:
1986. This report sumarizes Federal programs and identifies three major areas of State and local government concern: prevention and enforcement planning and data activities, emergency response and trair.ing, and gathering. A second report which is due out soon outlines related issues, describes methods by which jurisdictions are responding to them, and documents the concerns that.the Federal Government could address.
NRC Actions To more fully understand the institutional relationships and problems which are associated with present spent fuel shipments or future waste shipments under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, NRC has a study The ongoing to survey and evaluate the West Valley spent fuel shipments. Also, final report of this two and one half year study is due this sumer.
we are beginning to explore with the National Congress of American Indians and others the nature of the interaction among the Federal Government, the Indian Tribes regarding transportation on routes across States and We are trying to learn how reservations and the impacts of these shipments.
emergency responses to accidents are made on Tribal land and what the best approach should be. We in NRC are attempting to gain a better understanding We are trying of the Tribal views and ways to accomodate their concerns. 24, 1983, to implement President Reagan's Indian Policy Statement of January that Tribal governments, like State and local governments, are more aware of the needs and desires of their citizens than is the Federal Government and, should therefore, have the primary responsibility for meeting those needs.
O e
e W
f
,_ ._