shipments to NWPA facilities and for shipments related to research and development activities (ibid., p. A-17). The passage of the NWPA effectively eliminated prenotification of states as an issue by requiring OCRWM to“abide by regulations of the [Nuclear Regulatory] Commission regarding advance notification of State and local governments prior to transportation of spent nuclear fuel or high- level radioactive waste” (NWPA, Section 180(b)). 20 NRC regulations in 10 CFR 73.37 and, for smaller amounts of spent fuel, 71.97 require shippers to provide notification to state governors or their designees. If mailed, the notification must be postmarked at least seven days before a shipment; if delivered via messenger, the notification must arrive at least four days before the shipment. Shippers must notify the recipients by telephone if the schedule changes by more than six hours. The regulations also specify the type of information shippers must include in notifications. The combination of schedule and route information makes the notification safeguards information; therefore, strict rules apply to the further sharing of such information. NRC regulations prohibit recipients from releasing schedule information until 10 days after a shipment involving spent fuel that is subject to 10 CFR 73.37 (10 CFR 73.21(b)(2)(ii)). The DOE Manual states that “DOE or its contractors will provide advance notification of non-classified shipments of SNF and HLW in accordance with applicable requirements” (DOE 2008f, p. 28). The manual further states that “DOE will strive to ensure that affected jurisdictions are provided with general knowledge several weeks in advance of upcoming shipments” (ibid.). This additional advance notice is particularly important for states that will be scheduling escorts and/or inspections of shipments. The states have suggested that, for repository shipments, they would benefit from a “rolling schedule” similar to the “eight-week schedule” that the Carlsbad Field Office provides for shipments of transuranic waste heading to WIPP. OCRWM did not reach the point of discussing with the states a way to develop a planning tool similar to the WIPP eight-week schedule that would be compliant with the NRC safeguards requirements, therefore this issue remains open. An additional prenotification issue is the notification of tribal governments. For DOE shipments conducted under departmental
route information, expected dose rates, safe parking locations, inspections already conducted, and the presence of state escorts in neighboring states (CSG Midwest et al., p. 6). The survey revealed that, throughout the country, states placed a high priority on receiving each of the pieces of information. The lowest ranking went to information on cask models, although even this piece of information was found to be moderately important (scoring 3 points out of 5, with 1 being the highest ranking). The states reported the need for the same type of information regardless of the shipping mode (ibid.). There was some variation with regard to how far in advance the states wished to receive information. Starting in 2007, DOE stopped posting spent fuel shipments on the PSR reportedly due to security concerns. DOE cited NRC safeguard restrictions as the rationale, since the department has committed to meet or exceed NRC regulations for its shipments. In March 2008, the Midwestern andWestern states joined together to seek an opinion from the NRC regarding whether the type of information provided in the PSR would, indeed, violate safeguards concerns (Schroeder and Janairo 2008, p. 1). The NRC’s response indicated that “an annual table summarizing projected spent fuel shipments, containing data such as material, origin, pass thru states, destination, etc., would not be considered Safeguards Information” (Holahan 2008, p. 1). The letter went on to state that “dissemination of the information would be protected as ‘Official Use Only – Security Related Information’ by the NRC and would be released on a need- to-know basis” (ibid.). The NRC also acknowledged that “DOE has its own internal policies and procedures for identifying sensitive information…[t]herefore, DOE would make the final determination on the marking and protection of such information” (ibid., p. 1). Going forward, it would be beneficial for OCRWM to work with the states to identify their information needs. Updating the regional groups’ survey would be a good first step. The Midwest, for its part, will continue to advocate for improvements to the PSR to make the document a detailed, complete record of upcoming shipments to which all DOE shipping programs routinely report. PRENOTIFICATION The NWPA requires OCRWM to follow NRC regulations for notifying states and tribes about shipments. In addition to the required seven-day notification, for a large, sustained shipping campaign, the states will need timely information in advance to help them plan for inspections and escorts. Furthermore, with regard to tribal notifications, the NRC regulations currently do not allow for tribes to receive advance notification. In 2010, the NRC is preparing to issue for comment revised rules that would allow for tribal prenotification. OCRWM identified the issue of prenotification in the Transportation Institutional Plan as an original discussion paper (DOE 1986c, p. A-15). At issue was how OCRWMwould provide notification to states for
20 NRC regulations do not actually require prenotification of local governments.
100
Made with FlippingBook Annual report