Re: ANSI RAM Transportation Meeting

[BRZGV@ccmail.ceco.com]

     Is there any additional information available at this time concerning 
     the differences between SCO and LSA?  I have heard opinions from 
     shippers concerning where they would draw the line between the two 
     classes and some of the opinions seem reasonable and some not quite so 
     reasonable.
     
     This debate is even more important for shippers who ship a wide 
     variety of items.  Individual shippers and utilities are making their 
     own opinions in the absence of any additional clarification from the 
     rule making bodies.  A set of "Questions and Answers" much like those 
     generated for the implementation of the new 10 CFR 20 would be very 
     helpful in shaping the opinions of shippers and help provide 
     consistency.  A Reg Guide with opinions concerning the shipping of 
     various types of equipment or materials would make a great basis for 
     shippers to make decisions about which class to use.
     
     I have already heard of shipments where items were shipped to a 
     facility as LSA or SCO, but the equipment was later shipped out as the 
     opposite due to the opinion of the site shipper.
     
     A couple of quick problems off the cuff:
     
     Heat exchanger tube bundle
     Scaffold poles in a Sea-land container
     Scaffold knuckles in a box
     Electronic instrumentation with internal contamination
     Multistage centrifugal charging pump with internal contamination
     
     
     Sincerely,
     Glen Vickers
     brzgv@ccmail.ceco.com


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: ANSI RAM Transportation Meeting
Author:  radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu at INTERNET
Date:    12/6/96 12:38 PM


     
The annual meeting of the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) 
N14 accredited standards committee was held on November 7, 1996 at the 
headquarters of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).  
The meeting was information rich and very well seasoned.  The meeting was 
managed by the Chairperson, John Arendt.  John is a professional engineer 
and consultant that serves as a member of the U.S. Nuclear Waste 
Technical Review Board.  John presented a report on International 
Regulatory Developments prepared by Ron Pope of Oak Ridge National 
Laboratory and Mike Wangler of EM-76 as they were in Vienna and could not 
attend the meeting. Charles Haughney, Acting Director of the Spent Fuel 
Project Office, provided opening remarks of encouragement to the committee.
     
The Department of Energy (DOE) had a strong presence at the meeting.  
Richard J. Serbu provided extensive information regarding the National 
Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 and the resulting 
potential impact on Federal Rule-Making and Standard-Setting.  Richard 
Brancato, Director of the DOE Office of Transportation, Emergency 
Management and Analytical Services (EM-76), spoke of the changes ahead as 
DOE changes emphasis from information services to logistics.  Ted Needles 
of EM-76 discussed the Packaging and Transportation Safety Special 
Interest Group (PATS SIG) and welcomed participation in the group
Richard Boyle presented an update on activities at the Department of 
Transportation.  Work continues towards HM-169 and DOT is providing 
training to former Soviet block countries.
     
Ross Chappell presented an update from the NRC.  The Commission adopted 
the 1985 IAEA transportation safety regulations in the past year.  Future 
fabrications of Type B packagings must operate under the new rules by 
1998.  A more complicated definition of low-specific-activity (LSA) has 
been established in the new rules and LSA is to be regulated under DOT if 
non-fissile.  The current LSA rules were extended to 1998-1999; the LSA 
must be based on the DOT and use the IP-1, -2, -3 packagings as defined 
in the new rules.  NRC revised all Type B packagings
Beth Darrough of the United States Enrichment Corporation spoke of the 
recent compliance testing programs conducted in San Antonio for the 21 PF 
overpacks.  Testing results were favorable and the owners will now 
consider certification options.
     
Miriam (Mimi) Welch distributed information regarding the ANSI internet 
homepage and explained the ANSI policies regarding costs for standards 
and why they are not available on-line.
     
Professional involvement in ANSI Standard development (particularly on 
writing groups) is sorely needed.  Volunteer Today...
     
     
* * M E R R Y * * C H R I S T M A S * * H A P P Y * * H A N U K K A H * * 
     
Bill Pitchford   Bill.Pitchford@asu.edu
Radiation Protection Facility (602)965-6140 voice 
Arizona State University http://www.asu.edu 
Campus Box 873501  (602)965-6609 facsimile
Tempe, Arizona 85287-3501 http://physics.isu.edu
     
http://physics.isu.edu/health-physics/health-physics.html
     
* * H A P P Y * * H A N U K K A H * * M E R R Y * * C H R I S T M A S * *