Las Vegas Meeting - January 1998

MEETING OVERVIEW

The Transportation External Coordination Working Group (TEC/WG) held its 13^th semi-annual meeting January 20-22, 1998 in Las Vegas, Nevada. Over 150 members, participants, and observers representing state, tribal, and local governments, regional groups, industry and professional organizations, and the Department of Energy met to address a variety of issues related to DOE’s transportation activities for radioactive materials. A number of Departmental programs with transportation components were represented, including: the Office of Environmental Management (EM); the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management; the Office of Naval Reactors (NR); the Waste Isolation Pilot Project (WIPP); and the Office of Defense Programs (DP).

TOPIC GROUP SUMMARIES

Routing

• Group reviewed and approved fourth draft of working paper "Routing Issues Related to U.S. Department of Energy Radioactive Materials Transportation: Discussion and Analysis"
• Group submitted working paper and draft list of "Stakeholder Recommendations" to TEC/WG and DOE

Group reached consensus on three major routing-related issues:

• DOE should develop standardized, cooperative approach to route   selection
• DOE needs to involve all stakeholders
• DOE should submit final version of Group’s working paper to other federal entities

Future topics for consideration:

• routing issues relevant to tribal entities and local jurisdictions
• further development of methodologies for mode and route specification

• Group reviewed and revised second draft of regulatory summary matrix entitled "Rail and Highway Regulations Relative to Transportation of Radioactive Materials and their Applicability to States, Tribes, Shippers, and Carriers"
• Group reviewed and revised second draft of inspection standards comparison matrix entitled "Comparison of Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance Recommended National Procedures and Out-of-Service Criteria for the Enhanced Safety Inspection of Commercial Highway Vehicles Transporting Transuranics, Spent Nuclear Fuel, and High Level Waste to Rail Inspection Standards"

  Future topics for consideration:

• regulatory and inspection issues as related to tribal authority
• application of WIPP Planning Implementation Guide to rail specific issues

• Group reviewed and released a matrix detailing advantages and disadvantages of possible funding mechanisms for ensuring safe transportation and emergency response

• Group assessed detailed issues impacting the scope, viability and feasibility of a Department-Wide block grant

Future topics for consideration:

• internal DOE coordination on logistics of and mechanisms for funding
• determining types of programs and activities that should be included

• Three working groups created to consider Pre-Hospital, Hospital, and Delivery Mode Training issues

• Group examining issues of program fragmentation and resource and funding needs for training responders

• Group developing preliminary definitions of "core competency" by job classification for emergency responders

• Group considering use of existing infrastructure and professional organizations in dissemination of information and marketing products to medical emergency response community

General Planning

Three primary topics of discussion in the General Planning Breakout Groups:

• Baseline Disposition maps

• Funding mechanisms as discussed by Funding and Technical Assistance Topic Group

• Section 180(c) and its integration with the OCRWM Draft RFP

Suggestions on the topic of the baseline disposition maps included:

• Addition of an acronym glossary
• A reduced reliance on "DOE speak" and other technical jargon
• Use of a standardized term, i.e. "MTU", when referring to spent fuel
• Present maps in progressively greater detail—simple graph first, followed by a series of maps for any one waste stream. Data should also be presented geographically.
• Provide a more robust explanation of the data and how it was gathered—"pedigree of the decision"
• Footnote reasons why the data has changed or could change
• Consider what mechanisms can be used for public access of the information. Suggestions included posting to NTP website, hard copy distribution, or dissemination through stakeholder groups like the TEC/WG
• Creation of topic group to review methods of communication with various publics

Suggestions on the topic of funding mechanisms included:

• Review of matrix submitted to TEC/WG by Funding and Technical Assistance Topic Group
• Promote more internal DOE discussion on the subject
• Closer examination needed of DOE-wide block grant for training to states and tribes. Possibly combine with continued funding to regional compact organizations for planning, coordination, and support of said training
• Consider items detailed in Attachment A of matrix completed by FTA Topic Group

Suggestions on the topic of Section 180(c) included:

• Consideration of any possible difference(s) between the schedule for the draft and final OCRWM RFP and the schedule for the draft and final Section 180(c) policy and procedures
• Further clarification of Section 180(c) necessary
• States would prefer a finalized version of Section 180(c)
• Further consideration of rule-making necessary

Transportation Operations

Three primary concerns identified by the Transportation Operations Breakout Groups were:

1. TO-3: "Notification Policy"—need to resolve outstanding issue of what DOE policy (as determined by the NRC) should be concerning the advance notification of tribal jurisdictions of upcoming shipping campaigns.
2. TO-19: "Rail Inspection" has the outstanding action item of an official FRA response to DOE on the issue of state and tribal authority to stop and inspect rail shipments within their jurisdictions.
3.  TO-21: "Infrastructure Upgrades". TEC/WG members expressed dissatisfaction with DOE-GC’s reluctance to consider what (if any) obligations DOE has to provide funding and other support for infrastructural upgrades that may be made necessary by the anticipated increase in the number of shipping campaigns.

Emergency Management Planning & Training Assistance

TEC/WG Members reviewed and offered comments on several planning and training products and projects currently under development by the Transportation Emergency Preparedness Program (TEPP). Some of these items included:

• The TEPP Response Procedure Model
• The TEPP Tabletop/Drill/Exercise Manual
• The TEPP Model Annex and Standard Content Guide for Emergency Plans
• The TEPP Contact Guide and Telephone Directory
• The TEPP Job-Task Analysis for RAM Response
• An exhibit of the training tools and materials available through HAMMER

Suggestions by the TEC/WG included:

• TEPP should release products (even in draft form) as quickly as possible to provide guidance to emergency response professionals; perhaps make available via World Wide Web
• All planning documents should include express mention of tribes
• Coordinate Tech Base Document, Job-Task Analysis, and training module learning objectives
• Revise Medical Message Index to include pediatric scope

Meeting Evaluation Returns

According to attendees, the most popular sessions were:

• Emergency Management Planning and Training Assistance
• Breakout/Panel Discussion on Rail Shipments of Foreign Research Reactor SNF and Naval Fuel(tie)
• Routing Topic Group meeting
  Topic Group Reports
• Breakout Group Reports

Suggestions for future meetings:

• More information on prospective shipping campaigns
• More discussion of the role of states and corridor jurisdictions
• Need for more direct participation by meeting attendees—make meeting less of a "briefing"
• Future plenary on lessons learned from WIPP planning (and operations after it opens)
• Future plenary on public outreach—what mechanisms available, how to improve, etc.