A change of scenery

It is funny how just when you think you are locked into a routine for the long haul things can change so rapidly. I have been a staff member at the US National Transportation Research Center (NTRC) for nearly 10 years. In this position I had managed the Oak Ridge National Laboratory’s (ORNL’s) Package Testing Program as well as supported the US Department of Energy (DOE) Packaging Certification Program and the US DOE National Nuclear Security Administration’s Office of Packaging and Transportation, amongst other sponsors. I had settled in and figured this was likely the last stop in my career and that my work duties would remain relatively unchanged from now until retirement. But suddenly the scenery changed and I find myself a long way away from where I was just few months ago.

As many in our readership are aware, the path forward for disposition and or disposal of the used fuel generated by the USA’s commercial nuclear power reactors is murky at best. During the early part of the past decade, the plan was to open a repository at the Yucca Mountain site in the US state of Nevada. I worked for some time as part of the Transportation Operations Team developing flowcharts for how the day-to-day transportation system would operate. However, once President Obama was elected the US Senate Majority leader Harry Reid, who hails from the state of Nevada, was able to get all work on the development of the Yucca Mountain repository stopped. President Obama subsequently appointed the Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s Nuclear Future whose charter included:

• evaluation of existing fuel cycle technologies and R&D programs.

• recommendations on options for safe storage of used nuclear fuel while final disposition pathways are selected and deployed.

• recommendations on options for permanent disposal of used fuel and/or high-level nuclear waste, including deep geological disposal.

In January 2012 this Blue Ribbon Commission (BRC) issued its final report to the US Secretary of Energy. In this report, the BRC provided a strategy with eight key elements:

1. A new, consent-based approach to siting future nuclear waste management facilities.

2. A new organization dedicated solely to implementing the waste management program and empowered with the authority and resources to succeed.

3. Access to the funds nuclear utility ratepayers are providing for the purpose of nuclear waste management.

4. Prompt efforts to develop one or more geological disposal facilities.

5. Prompt efforts to develop one or more consolidated storage facilities.

6. Prompt efforts to prepare for the eventual large-scale transport of spent nuclear fuel and high-level waste to consolidated storage and disposal facilities when such facilities become available.

7. Support for continued US innovation in nuclear energy technology and for workforce development.

8. Active US leadership in international efforts to address safety, waste management, non-proliferation, and security concerns.¹

In January of 2013, the Obama Administration, through the US Department of Energy (DOE), issued its response to the BRC report, entitled ‘Strategy for the management and disposal of used nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste’.² This document outlined a plan that included the opening of a pilot interim storage facility for used nuclear fuel (UNF) and high-level radioactive waste (HLRW) by 2021, the opening of a full-scale interim storage site in 2025, and the availability of a geological repository by 2048. In the meantime, within DOE’s Nuclear Energy Division, the Nuclear Fuels Storage and Transportation Planning Project (NFST) was chartered to enact this strategy. Jeff Williams was appointed to lead NFST at the federal level and John Wagner of ORNL was appointed to be Jeff’s National Technical Director. I had had some previous interface with John Wagner while working on the Yucca Mountain Project, though we did not know each other well. However, he initially involved me in NFST activities at a low level while we discussed the possibility of my taking a more active role. In late April I received a brief email from Wagner asking for a résumé and then a follow-up meeting request. I did not realize at the time that the meeting was really a job interview. As it turns out, John was looking for an individual who was willing to work full-time as the NFST Control Account Manger for Transportation. In this role, the successful candidate would oversee the development of the NFST transportation system at the laboratory level while being responsive to the sponsor’s needs. John made it clear during the interview, that if I was offered the job and accepted, he would expect me to transfer into his group and also relinquish the vast majority of the roles I had been playing at the NTRC.

To make a long story short, I was offered the job the following week. Admittedly, I was a little anxious about leaving the friendly confines of the NTRC and returning to an office on the campus of Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Additionally, the thought of an extra 40 minutes or so of driving every day was not a plus. However, the opportunity to take the lead in developing the transportation system for UFD and HLRW was just too great of an offer to turn down. As I told my wife, ‘This is the job I have been training for my entire career.’

Within a month, I had moved my office and was functioning within the NFST Program (and was drinking from the proverbial fire hose). Very quickly, I was knee deep in the early stages of developing the infrastructure that will be needed to transport these materials regardless of where the ultimate destination may be. During the Yucca Mountain Project development, the transportation system had been organized into three primary areas: Institutional, Operations, and Hardware – and this structure had been carried forward to NFST. These days, instead of preparing test plans and test reports or writing safety guides, I am busy developing the process that will eventually result in railcars that meet the American Railroads Association’s Standard S–2043: ‘Performance specification for trains used to carry high-level radioactive materials’;³ learning about the process for interacting with the State Regional Groups that are our interface with all of the states that we may eventually make shipments through; and studying various origin sites to determine the path forward for moving material from their site through the US rail network (and, in some cases, how the material will get from the origin site to the rail network).

I think I was growing complacent in my former position, not so much from laziness but more from comfort. To be sure, I am not at the comfort level I was before this change and with that comes an urgency to perform and to learn what had faded in my previous situation. As I finish this editorial, I sit looking out my office window. Did I mention that my new office came with a window – something I had not had in my 28 years here at Oak Ridge National Laboratory? It is a beautiful day outside and I can see the sun shining on the rolling hills of East Tennessee. I think this change of scenery fits me well and I look forward to the challenges afforded me by this new opportunity.

Cheers,

Matt