The Midwestern Radioactive Materials Transportation Committee (MRMTC)'s Greg Gothard (MI) was in Idaho Falls for the Fall 2023 Joint High-Level Radioactive Waste Committee Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Transportation Advisory Group meeting facilitated by the Western Interstate Energy Board (WIEB) at the end of November. He heard updates from the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) personnel on their preparation to receive shipments of plutonium from Savannah River site. This shipping campaign will possibly include 145,000 drums to be processed over the next 35-years in Type A packages. Additionally, attendees toured the Idaho National Laboratory (INL). They were able to see the naval spent nuclear fuel (SNF) shipments that arrive from both submarines and aircraft carriers, as well as observe the construction of a new processing facility specifically for aircraft carrier fuel. Attendees were able to view INL's dry storage cask installation as well as the Idaho Nuclear Technical and Engineering Center (INTEC) where various wastes are processed for packaging. The tour finished at the Radioactive Waste Management Complex (RWMC), which houses all the drums of waste waiting to be shipped to WIPP.

Also this month, the MRMTC's Swapan Saha (KS) attended the Northeast High-Level Radioactive Waste Transportation Task Force's Fall meeting. Dr. Saha reported that a new co-chair of the task force was elected and attendees received updates on the decommissioning of Maine Yankee, Connecticut Yankee, and Yankee Rowe Nuclear Power Plants and Three Mile Island (TMI) transportation issues. The task force discussed the challenges of moving canisters from the TMI site, including the need for large cranes, rigging equipment, and heavy haul trucks. They also discussed the need for access to direct rail/barge, rail/heavy haul road, and rail options for transporting the canisters. The Department of Energy (DOE) updated the task force on transportation goals and their work with stakeholders and citizen advisory boards to address transportation logistics. The DOE also offered updates on the Ad Hoc Working Groups with whom work seems to be continuing apace. Transportation Security Unified Stakeholders Group (TSUSG) reported on their activities and the DOE's Transportation Emergency Preparedness Program (TEPP) local training schedule for the remainder of FY23 was explained.

A big thanks to Greg and Swapan for their attendance at these meetings and the sedulous attention they paid to transcribing their experiences!

 Recognition of Eric Howes representing the 3Yankee’s for his participation with the Northeast Task Force providing information on the status of the spent nuclear fuel (SNF) issue in the northeast and nationally

Members of The National Transportation Stakeholders Forum (NTSF) Planning Committee attended a virtual meeting on November 2. The discussion continues to focus heavily on determining topics for breakout sessions. The committee debated the importance of having sessions that appeal to an audience new to the project of transporting spent nuclear fuel (SNF) in addition to topics geared toward a more seasoned listener. Whilst no final decision has been reached, there appears to be preliminary agreement that entry-level topical sessions make good sense.

The general categories into which breakout sessions will likely fall include law enforcement, emergency preparedness and response resources, foundational knowledge, Advanced reactors, Microreactors, and the nuclear fuel cycle. Clearly, there will be something for everyone.

Also, we wish to remind everyone that presentations from the 2023 meeting have been uploaded to the NTSF website and are available for perusal along with NTSF webinars from previous years (2014 - 2022). If you fancy a walk down memory lane, you can find and view these webinars here.

A Stellar Solution to SNF?

"Recently, the subject of disposal of nuclear waste has received a lot of attention..." Whilst this sentence reads as inescapably modern, it was actually written 45 years ago after the Connecticut Yankee decision restricted the nuclear industry until a solution to the intractable conundrum of permanent SNF disposal was found. Then (as now) the DOE was exploring deep geological repositories that met the criteria for safety and security over eons, but then (unlike now) four space scientists suggested an extraterrestrial solution to the imbroglio.

"The disposal of certain components of high level (sic) nuclear waste in space appears to be feasible from a technical standpoint," reads the opening sentence of National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Technical Paper 1225 published in May 1978. This 118-page report articulates the findings of the study undertaken by R.E. Burns, W.E. Causey, W.E. Galloway, and R.W. Nelson. An earlier study was completed in 1973 by NASA at the behest of the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), and that study also found "that disposal into space of the long-lived actinides appeared feasible, from both an economic and safety viewpoint." The operative word, however, appears to be "feasible." Something is feasible when it is possible. It is feasible that one might eat chocolate for every meal for every day for a month, but that does not mean it is a good idea to do so. The practicality of disposing SNF in space is "viable" (in addition to "feasible") due to the "very small amounts of very toxic waste." That is, the report clarifies that employing such an exotic method of waste management is not viable for most industrial scale wastes due to their sheer volume, but it is viable for nuclear industry wastes due to the relatively small quantities. Viability, in this case, hinges on volume, according to NASA.

Nevertheless, space disposal of SNF would require the processing of nuclear waste products so that they are separated into different groups; inert byproducts would remain on Earth whilst the toxic components would be lofted into space. Launching a fuel rod bundle in toto to space would involve a tremendous number of space flights (relying on a high-performance orbit transfer vehicle and a shuttle-derived heavy lift launch vehicle). The greater the number of flights, the greater the possibility of an ascent failure. In contrast, if the waste is processed so that only the most toxic and longevous wastes are propelled into space, fewer flights are required and "fewer flights improve ascent safety." The report states that separation of the unused uranium and cladding would reduce the launch rate by a factor of nearly 40.

"Even at the present level of understanding," reads the 1978 report, "it is apparent the space and terrestrial options for nuclear waste management have differing characteristics." The report states that terrestrial disposal methods have the advantage of requiring standard transportation schemes to move the SNF to the final containment site, but problems resulting from the long periods of required confinement are obdurate. "Catastrophic events such as earthquakes or intrusive acts by deranged humans are always a possibility. Lower level (sic) failures... could occur over geologic time periods without visible evidence for many years."

The extraterrestrial option presents a different matrix of difficulty. According to the report, the entire risk in space disposal occurs during transport to the destination. Once the payload of SNF arrives at the destination, the inviolate laws of physics can ensure the complete isolation of waste from the biosphere. The report notes that "catastrophic events on the level of planetary collisions are excluded [from consideration], but, in such a case, nuclear waste could hardly be considered to pose any additional hazard."

Whilst the vast sweep of space presents virtually infinite destinations for the placement of SNF, the report considered only six: high Earth orbit, lunar orbit, lunar soft landing, heliocentric orbit, solar system escape, and solar impact. All destinations have advantages and disadvantages that range from launch rate and energy requirements to retrievability of the payload and non-nominal orbits with sensitivity to lunar or solar perturbations. The report concludes that "except for the small payload, the solar escape mission is the most attractive mission. However, overall the best options are (1) the lunar surface and (2) solar orbit."

Whilst the report does not make recommendations, it does state that "space disposal of nuclear waste is an option which offers permanent disposal of the waste, and has the unique characteristic that the mission risk period in which critical failure can occur is limited to a few days... to approximately 6 months. Failures can be detected in real time and corrective action can be initiated immediately." This timid endorsement is counterbalanced by the sobering observation that "at most, a mission failure in either the Apollo or Viking programs resulted in the loss of several hundred million dollars, and in the Apollo program, a three man (sic) crew. However, in the space disposal of nuclear waste, a mission failure could endanger the lives of thousands of people."

The 1978 NASA Technical Paper 1225 is a fascinating read and well worth the time it takes to do so. The report maintains laudable scientific dispassion whilst also communicating a sense of optimism. There are indeed challenges associated with the permanent disposal of SNF both on Earth and in space, and the report suggests that the challenges attendant to the era of bell bottom trousers and Led Zepplin can be solved by eras to come. Leggings and Taylor Swift may not have been the solutions hoped for, but they are unlikely to be the final incarnation of fashion and music. Geological depositories are a solution being explored today. Perhaps stellar depositories tomorrow?

Nuclear News

Michigan's Senate Bill 0271 Deems Nuclear Energy "Clean"

Bridge Michigan reported on November 3 that the Michigan house approved a suite of reforms that represent the most significant overhaul to the state's energy approach since 2016. The climate change and energy measures were approved along party lines and represent an unflinching commitment to clean energy. Under the new language, regulated utilities have until 2027 to derive 15% of their energy from renewable sources with the requirement gradually increasing toward the target of 100% clean energy by 2040. The bill identifies nuclear energy as clean energy, along with renewables and natural gas with carbon capture. Read the text of Senate Bill 0271 here.

Nation's First HALEU Produced in Ohio

Piketon, Ohio's Centrus Energy Corp has produced the country's first 20 kilograms of high-assay low-enriched uranium (HALEU) in more than 70 years, the DOE announced on its website on November 7. The DOE awarded American Centrifuge Operating, a subsidiary of Centrus, a contract in November 2022 to start enriching limited quantities of uranium hexafluoride gas into HALEU. Centrus started the enrichment cascade earlier this month and met this year's production goal of 20 kilograms ahead of schedule. The Ohio plant is currently the only facility in the U.S. licensed to enrich uranium up to 19.75 percent. It is also the first domestic plant to enrich uranium since the 1950s. There is no commercial source of HALEU currently outside Russia, meaning that Centrus' plant will be "essential to meeting the Department's near-term HALEU needs, while laying the groundwork for the full restoration of America's lost domestic uranium enrichment capacity," said Centrus President and CEO Daniel B. Poneman.

Illinois Senate Approves New Nuclear Reactors

The Illinois Senate approved lifting a 36-year old moratorium on new nuclear power facilities on November 8. Under the legislation, Illinois will allow the development of small modular reactors (SMRs) beginning in January 2026, when a report on necessary safety measures and updated guidelines will be due. The plan assigns the Illinois Emergency Management Agency oversight of newly installed reactors, which was a late addition to the legislation added by sponsoring Sen. Sue Rezin to appease Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker. Read more at AP News.

Safford Named NRC's Commission Secretary

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) new Secretary, Carrie M. Safford, commenced her duties on November 5. She is the fifth person in the 48-year history of the NRC to hold this position. Safford will provide executive management services to support the NRC and act to implement Commission decisions. Electric Energy Online reports that the Office of the Secretary handles scheduling Commission meetings, managing the Commission's decision-making process, and controlling Commission correspondence among other responsibilities. Safford joined the NRC in 2008 as an attorney. She has been serving as a Deputy Director in the Division Fuel Management, which has regulatory responsibility for nuclear fuel cycle activities in the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.

South Dakota Considers Nuclear Options

South Dakota Public Broadcasting published an article on November 16 indicating Legislative Research Council staff recommendations were submitted to state officials. Among those recommendations was one by Melanie Dumdei, an attorney for the Legislative Research Council, in which she presented nuclear power as a viable option for the state. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) reports having 37 agreements with states on nuclear power options. South Dakota, however, is one of 10 states that do not have a nuclear agreement. South Dakota had a nuclear power plant in Sioux Falls in 1966, but the plant was in service for less than two years and never produced energy for the local grid. Rather, the project served as a demonstration and research project for nuclear power plants currently servicing neighboring states. Ms. Dumdei suggests that should change as nuclear power is an efficient energy source that is becoming increasingly cost competitive. "The most relevant portion to our legislature highlights how a state can adopt nuclear power," she said.



UK Begins Work to Permanently Secure Nuclear Waste Vaults

Nuclear Waste Services (NWS), a core member of the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority that is responsible for keeping the UK's former nuclear sites and facilities safe and secure, has commenced initial operations to cap and secure nuclear waste stored in the Low Level Waste Repository on the North West coast of England. The repository is the UK's primary low-level waste disposal facility and it has received wastes from producers including nuclear power facilities, defense establishments, and general industry. Starting in 1959, nearly 800,000 cubic meters of waste was disposed in trenches, called vaults, which are now full and ready for permanent closure. The first phase of capping operations involves installing a permanent membrane over the old trenches to protect waste for up to 100 years. This phase is anticipated to take five years. The UK has been producing and managing nuclear waste for many decades and will continue to do so. According to Gov.UK "nuclear power is viewed by the UK Government as essential to the low-carbon energy mix" and "the Welsh Government also supports nuclear new build."

Let Us Read, And Let Us Dance

Voltaire declared that these two amusements -- reading and dancing -- will never do any harm to the world and, in service to bonhomie, Dr. Steve Maheras of the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) wanted to highlight another publication of interest to the MRMTC. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) published a report entitled Radiation Protection Programmes for the Transport of Radioactive Material. This safety guide provides recommendations on meeting the requirements established in IAEA Safety Standards for a radiation protection program for the transport of radioactive material. The recommendations included in this guide are applicable to the transport of radioactive material by all modes on land, water, or in the air. It may also be of interest to the employees of public authorities concern activities associated with the transport of radioactive material that involve radiation exposure.