ASSESSING EXPOSURE TO THE PUBLIC FROM LOW LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE (LLW) TRANSPORTATION TO THE NEVADA TEST SITE.


Book Description

The United States (U.S.) Department of Energy (DOE) Nevada Test Site (NTS) is one of two regional sites where low-level radioactive waste (LLW) from approved DOE and U.S. DOD generators across the United States is disposed. In federal fiscal year (FY) 2002, over 57,000 cubic meters of waste was transported to and disposed at the NTS. DOE and U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) regulations ensure that radiation exposure from truck shipments to members of the public is negligible. Nevertheless, particularly in rural communities along transportation routes in Utah and Nevada, there is perceived risk from members of the public about incremental exposure from LLW trucks, especially when ''Main Street'' and the LLW transportation route are the same. To better quantify the exposure to gamma radiation, a stationary monitoring array of four pressurized ion chambers (PICs) have been set up in a pullout just before LLW trucks reach the entrance to the NTS. The PICs are positioned at a distance of one meter from the sides of the truck trailer and at a height appropriate for the design of the trucks that will be used in FY2003 to haul LLW to the NTS. The use of four PICs (two on each side of the truck) is to minimize and to correct for non-uniformity where radiation levels from waste packages vary from side to side, and from front to back in the truck trailer. The PIC array is being calibrated by collecting readings from each PIC exposed to a known 137Cs source that was positioned at different locations on a flatbed stationed in the PIC array, along with taking secondary readings from other known sources. Continuous data collection using the PICs, with and without a truck in the array, is being used to develop background readings. In addition, acoustic sensors are positioned on each side of the PIC array to record when a large object (presumably a truck) enters the array. In FY2003, PIC surveys from as many incoming LLW trucks as possible will be made and survey data recorded automatically by dataloggers that will be periodically downloaded. Solar panels provide power for the batteries to run both the dataloggers and PICs. Truck drivers have been asked to park their truck within the PIC array for only the time it takes to complete an information log before moving on to one of two Radioactive Waste Management Sites (RWMS) on the NTS. On the log, the truck drivers record their shipment identification number, the time of day, where the waste originated, and information on the route they used to reach the NTS. This data will facilitate comparison of PIC readings with waste manifests and other waste disposal operations data collected at the RWMSs. Gamma radiation measurements collected from the PICs will be analyzed using standard health physics and statistical methods for comparison to DOT standards, but with the added benefit of obtaining an improved understanding of the variability of readings that can occur in the near vicinity of a LLW truck. The data collected will be combined with measurements of street width and other information about transportation routes through towns to develop realistic dose scenarios for citizens in Nevada and Utah towns.




Going the Distance?


Book Description

This new report from the National Research Council's Nuclear and Radiation Studies Board (NRSB) and the Transportation Research Board reviews the risks and technical and societal concerns for the transport of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste in the United States. Shipments are expected to increase as the U.S. Department of Energy opens a repository for spent fuel and high-level waste at Yucca Mountain, and the commercial nuclear industry considers constructing a facility in Utah for temporary storage of spent fuel from some of its nuclear waste plants. The report concludes that there are no fundamental technical barriers to the safe transport of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive and the radiological risks of transport are well understood and generally low. However, there are a number of challenges that must be addressed before large-quantity shipping programs can be implemented successfully. Among these are managing "social" risks. The report does not provide an examination of the security of shipments against malevolent acts but recommends that such an examination be carried out.







Nevada Potential Repository Preliminary Transportation Strategy


Book Description

Limited feasible options exist when considering the shipment of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste. These options are rail or truck; because of the weight associated with transportation casks (68.0 to 113.4 tonnes/75 to 125 tons), heavy-haul trucks are also considered. Yucca Mountain currently lacks rail service or an existing right-of-way for rail; it also lacks a dedicated highway suitable for heavy-haul trucks. Approximately 11,230 shipments by rail are planned from waste producer sites to Nevada, with an additional 1,041 shipments by legal-weight truck from four reactor sites not capable of upgrading for rail shipment. This study identifies the reasonable alternatives for waste transport to the potential repository site, describes the evaluation process performed to identify those alternatives, and discusses the reasons for elimination of transportation routes deemed to be not reasonable. The study concluded that heavy haul truck transportation is feasible-cost is very favorable when compared to rail-but route restrictions must be further evaluated. In addition to restrictions due to seasonal weather conditions, specific routes have additional restrictions, including no travel on holidays or weekends, and travel during daylight hours only. Further restrictions will be imposed by the U.S. Department of Transportation based on routing of radioactive materials by highway. Operation and maintenance costs for heavy-haul over a 24-year period, based on preliminary information, were calculated on an estimated operational cost of $15,000 per trip, with an estimated 468 trips per year average (11,230 total trips), for an estimated cost of $171 million to $173 million, depending on the route used. Because the initial costs and the total system life cycle costs of heavy-haul are approximately 50 percent lower than the lowest rail cost, this option will continue to be evaluated.




A Common-sense Probabilistic Approach to Assessing Inadvertent Human Intrusion Into Low-level Radioactive Waste at the Nevada Test Site


Book Description

Each site disposing of low-level radioactive waste is required to prepare and maintain a site-specific performance assessment (1) to determine potential risks posed by waste management systems to the public, and the environment, and (2) to compare these risks to established performance objectives. The DOE Nevada Operations Office, Waste Management Program recently completed a one-year study of site-specific scenarios for inadvertent human intrusion by drilling into buried low-level radioactive waste sites, as part of ongoing performance assessment studies. Intrusion scenarios focus on possible penetration of buried waste through drilling for sources of groundwater. The probability of drilling penetration into waste was judged to be driven primarily by two settlement scenarios: (1) scattered individual homesteaders, and (2) a community scenario consisting of a cluster of settlers that share drilling and distribution systems for groundwater. Management control factors include institutional control, site knowledge, placards and markers, surface barriers, and subsurface barriers. The Subject Matter Experts concluded that institutional control and site knowledge may be important factors for the first few centuries, but are not significant over the evaluation period of 10,000 years. Surface barriers can be designed that would deter the siting of a drill rig over the waste site to an effectiveness of 95%. Subsurface barriers and placards and markers will not as effectively prevent inadvertent human intrusion. Homestead and community scenarios were considered by the panel to render a site-specific probability of around 10% for inadvertent human intrusion. If management controls are designed and implemented effectively, then the probability of inadvertent human intrusion can be reduced to less than 1%.




Annual Transportation Report for Radioactive Waste Shipments to and from the Nevada Test Site


Book Description

In February 1997, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Nevada Operations Office (now known as the Nevada Site Office) issued the Mitigation Action Plan which addressed potential impacts described in the "Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Nevada Test Site and Off-Site Locations in the State of Nevada" (DOE/EIS 0243). The U.S. Department of Energy, Nevada Operations Office committed to several actions, including the preparation of an annual report, which summarizes waste shipments to and from the Nevada Test Site (NTS) Radioactive Waste Management Site (RWMS) at Area 5 and Area 3. No shipments were disposed of at Area 3 in fiscal year (FY) 2008. This document satisfies requirements regarding low-level radioactive waste (LLW) and mixed low-level radioactive waste (MLLW) transported to or from the NTS during FY 2008. No transuranic (TRU) waste shipments were made from or to the NTS during FY 2008.




Special Analysis of Transuranic Waste in Trench T04C at the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site, Nevada Test Site, Nye County, Nevada, Revision 1


Book Description

This Special Analysis (SA) was prepared to assess the potential impact of inadvertent disposal of a limited quantity of transuranic (TRU) waste in classified Trench 4 (T04C) within the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site (RWMS) at the Nevada Test Site (NTS). The Area 5 RWMS is a low-level radioactive waste disposal site in northern Frenchman Flat on the Nevada Test Site (NTS). The Area 5 RWMS is regulated by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) under DOE Order 435.1 and DOE Manual (DOE M) 435.1-1. The primary objective of the SA is to evaluate if inadvertent disposal of limited quantities of TRU waste in a shallow land burial trench at the Area 5 RWMS is in compliance with the existing, approved Disposal Authorization Statement (DAS) issued under DOE M 435.1-1. In addition, supplemental analyses are performed to determine if there is reasonable assurance that the requirements of Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 191, Environmental Radiation Protection Standards for Management and Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel, High-Level, and Transuranic Radioactive Wastes, can be met. The 40 CFR 191 analyses provide supplemental information regarding the risk to human health and the environment of leaving the TRU waste in T04C. In 1989, waste management personnel reviewing classified materials records discovered that classified materials buried in trench T04C at the Area 5 RWMS contained TRU waste. Subsequent investigations determined that a total of 102 55-gallon drums of TRU waste from Rocky Flats were buried in trench T04C in 1986. The disposal was inadvertent because unclassified records accompanying the shipment indicated that the waste was low-level. The exact location of the TRU waste in T04C was not recorded and is currently unknown. Under DOE M 435.1-1, Chapter IV, Section P.5, low-level waste disposal facilities must obtain a DAS. The DAS specifies conditions that must be met to operate within the radioactive waste management basis, consisting of a performance assessment (PA), composite analysis (CA), closure plan, monitoring plan, waste acceptance criteria, and a PA/CA maintenance plan. The DOE issued a DAS for the Area 5 RWMS in 2000. The Area 5 RWMS DAS was, in part, based on review of a CA as required under DOE M 435.1-1, Chapter IV, Section P.(3). A CA is a radiological assessment required for DOE waste disposed before 26 September 1988 and includes the radiological dose from all sources of radioactive material interacting with all radioactive waste disposed at the Area 5 RWMS. The approved Area 5 RWMS CA, which includes the inventory of TRU waste in T04C, indicates that the Area 5 RWMS waste inventory and all interacting sources of radioactive material can meet the 0.3 mSv dose constraint. The composite analysis maximum annual dose for a future resident at the Area 5 RWMS was estimated to be 0.01 mSv at 1,000 years. Therefore, the inadvertent disposal of TRU in T04C is protective of the public and the environment, and compliant with all the applicable requirements in DOE M 435.1-1 and the DAS. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency promulgated 40 CFR 191 to establish standards for the planned disposal of spent nuclear fuel, high level, and transuranic wastes in geologic repositories. Although not required, the National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office requested a supplemental analysis to evaluate the likelihood that the inadvertent disposal of TRU waste in T04C meets the requirements of 40 CFR 191. The SA evaluates the likelihood of meeting the 40 CFR 191 containment requirements (CRs), assurance requirements, individual protection requirements (IPRs), and groundwater protection standards. The results of the SA indicate that there is a reasonable expectation of meeting all the requirements of 40 CFR 191. The conclusion of the SA is that the Area 5 RWMS with the TRU waste buried in T04C is in compliance with all requirements in DOE M 435.1-1 and the DAS. Compliance with the DAS is demonstrated by the results of the Area 5 RWMS CA. Supplemental analyses in the SA indicate there is a reasonable expectation that the TRU in T04C can meet all the requirements of 40 CFR 191. Therefore, inadvertent disposal of a limited quantity of TRU in a shallow land burial trench at the Area 5 RWMS does not pose a significant risk to the public and the environment.







Exposure Assessment of Groundwater Transport of Tritium from the Central Nevada Test Area


Book Description

This exposure assessment provides a range of possible human health risk at two locations due to groundwater transport from the Faultless underground nuclear test. These locations correspond to the boundary of the land under DOE control (where no wells currently exist) and the closest existing well (Six Mile Well). The range in excess risk is within the EPA goal for excess risk due to environmental contaminants (10−6) at Six Mile Well. Calculations considering high spatial variability in hydraulic properties and/or high uncertainty in the mean groundwater velocity are also within the EPA goal. At the DOE boundary, the range in excess risk exceeds the EPA goal, regardless of the values of spatial variability and uncertainty. The range in values of excess risk can be reduced with additional field data from the site; however, incorporation of additional data, which would likely be obtained at great expense, is unlikely to result in significant refinement of the results.