Year
2003
Abstract
A study of severe historical transportation accidents that may compromise a spent fuel cask was performed. The environments associated with these accidents were compared to the 10CFR71 [1] Hypothetical Accident Conditions and the accident environments (both regulatory and extraregulatory) investigated in “Shipping Container Response to Severe Highway and Railway Accident Conditions” (the Modal Study) [2], and in “Reexamination of Spent Fuel Shipment Risk Assessments”, NUREG/CR-6672 [3]. Engineering calculations and past studies were used for making the comparisons. Detailed modeling of the real accidents was not performed. The method used to perform this study was to review the NTSB accident reports and newspaper accounts to estimate the accident conditions and then use first principles and/or comparison to previous analyses to determine the loads (mechanical and/or thermal) that would have been imparted to a cask, had one been involved in the accident. In addition, these loads were compared to the loads from the regulatory accident sequence and to loads from extra-regulatory events evaluated in spent fuel transportation risk assessments. The types of accidents that were investigated include bridge collapse, propane tanker truck explosion, train derailment with subsequent hazardous material fire, train collision, and military munitions explosions. The results of this work can be used to demonstrate to the public how the regulatory hypothetical accident conditions compare to actual severe accidents that are in the historical record.