Package Performance Study Issues Being Considered

Sandia National Laboratories wrote "Spent Nuclear Fuel Transportation Package Performance Study Issues Report" ( NUREG/CR-6768 ) that presents the issues raised at this project's public meetings before 2003 , by questions submitted to this Web site, and in documents submitted to the NRC.

On this page:

• Specific Comments on the Test Protocols
• Options Reflective of Public Comments
• Commission Decision
• Path Forward

Specific Comments on the Test Protocols

Comments were being solicited on the "Package Performance Study Test Protocols" (NUREG-1768). Refer to the specific questions listed in the Executive Summary (Public Comments Section, pages 6 and 7) of the PPS Test Protocols Report. Staff have reviewed over 2,300 individual public comments.

Staff considered public comments (written and meeting comments). As a result, staff saw a need to focus on the following areas:

• PPS objectives
• Full scale testing
• Testing options -- those proposed by the public and not reflected in NUREG-1768

The alternative testing that the staff identified were grouped into three categories:

1. Regulatory testing
2. Extra-regulatory testing
3. Demonstration testing

Options Reflective of Public Comments

In February 2004, the staff developed a commission paper (SECY-04-0029) asking the Commission for guidance on which testing options to pursue. In the commission paper, staff identified the five major public comment themes and presented four testing options.

There were main themes resulting from the public comments:

1. Conflicting objectives -- technical and public confidence
2. Desire for full scale certification test sequence
3. Desire for realistic test scenarios
4. Request for testing cask to destruction/failure
5. Concern about terrorism and spent fuel casks

The four testing options were—

1. Perform the tests proposed in NUREG-1768 extra-regulatory testing.
2. Perform a combination of regulatory testing and demonstration testing for rail casks and an addition of a truck demonstration test. Regulatory testing would involve testing a cask without its conveyance as described in 10 CFR Part 71.73. Demonstration testing would involve testing a cask on its conveyance under simulated real world accident conditions.
3. Perform only rail cask testing. One rail cask would be testing per 10 CFR Part 71.73 and one would be tested under a simulated real world accident scenario.
4. Regulatory testing would only be conducted; two modes of transportation casks (rail and casks) would be used.

Commission Decision

This page includes links to files in non-HTML format. See Plugins, Viewers, and Other Tools for more information.

In May 2004, the Commission directed the staff to perform rail demonstration testing and to consider truck testing in the future (Revised SRM-SECY-04-0029). Staff wrote a detailed test plan and submitted it to the Commission for approval in July 2004 (SECY-04-0135).

Path Forward

Staff plans to do the following:

1. Develop a comment response document addressing comments received on NUREG-1768
2. Develop test metrics -- what will be measured in testing, what will be compared, etc.
3. Develop detailed test specifications and procedures
4. Perform predictive modeling
5. Procure cask
6. Perform test
7. Evaluate results
8. Report results

The public will be invited to witness the tests to better understand the testing and results. Also, NRC plans to engage the public throughout the project.

Reports and other communication tools will be used to inform the public about the results and what NRC will do with the results as a regulator and how they will affect (if applicable) the safety of future shipments of spent fuel.