Re: Real Transport Safety Issues

[Ted de Castro <tdc@XRAYTED.COM>]

Even here - isn't it interesting to note the number that COULD have been

killed HAD it ignited - compared to the numbers ACTUALLY killed or

injured in ALL the cited cases where ignition DID occur.



"Estabrooks, Bates (IHK)" wrote:

> 

> While I am sure that Norm Cohen is getting tired of the thrashings from

> RADSAFE folks, he needs to understand that what solicits these responses is

> the seeming disingenuous "safety concerns" that those of his ilk raise.

> Until DOT requires that LNG/Propane travel in Type B containers (as they do

> with spent nuclear fuel, HLW and TRU waste), perhaps Mr. Cohen should direct

> his energies/concerns to that arena.  The excerpt to follow, from the EPA

> link given, should have "Salem Unplugged" pulling their own plug and turning

> their attention to LNG tankers.  From the EPA:

> 

>                 "SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

> 

>                 I. Background On September 8, 1996, more than 35,000 gallons

> of propane were released during a delivery at a bulk storage facility in

> Sanford, North Carolina. During the unloading of a specification MC 331

> cargo tank motor vehicle into two 30,000-gallon storage tanks, the discharge

> hose from the cargo tank separated at its hose coupling at the storage tank

> inlet connection. Most of the cargo tank's 9,800 gallons and more than

> 30,000 gallons from the storage tanks were released during this incident. If

> this large quantity of propane had reached an ignition source, 125 people

> (workers, residents and emergency responders) could have been killed. The

************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text "unsubscribe

radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.