HIGHWAY 3. 1: An enhanced HIGHWAY routing model: Program description, methodology, and revised user's manual

Life-Cycle Cost and Risk Analysis of Alternative Configurations for Shipping Low-Level Radioactive Waste to the Nevada Test Site

“…The RADTRAN 4 computer code (Neuhauser and Kanipe 1992) was used to calculate the routine (or incidentfree) radiological doses and accident risks of the in-transit segments between LLW generator sites and NTS. The HIGHWAY (Johnson et al 1993a) and INTERLINE (Johnson et al 1993b) computer codes were implemented to develop the routing data (e.g., shipping distances and population distributions along the routes) that is used by the RADTRAN 4 code. Published unit risk factors (risk per unit distance traveled) are used to estimate the physical impacts of accidents during the in-transit segments.…”

“…The following sections present descriptions of RADTRAN 4 and the HIGHWAY (Johnson et al 1993a) and INTERLINE (Johnson et al 1993b) routing models. For additional information, readers are referred to the computer codes' user's manuals.…”

Generalized route planning model for hazardous material transportation with VaR and equity considerations

“…Erkut et al [15] described and made an empirical comparison of ten heuristics for the discrete p-dispersion problem. Akgün et al [3] present an improvement by selecting a subset from a large set of candidate paths and use a dispersion model to maximize the minimum dissimilarity among the paths in the subset, and compare their computational result with three other methods, the Iterative Penalty Method [21], the Gateway Shortest Path Method [29] and Minimax method [25]. Duarte and Marti [11] proposed and solved a similar maximum diversity problem with a constructive semi-greedy algorithm and a tabu search method.…”

Risk assessment for the off-site transportation of high-level waste for the U.S. Department of Energy waste management programmatic environmental impact statement

“…Route characteristics are summarized in Table 4.1 for both truck and rail modes. The routes were selected to be consistent with current routing practices (Johnson et al 1993a). …”

“…The representative truck and rail routes were determined by using the routing models HIGHWAY 3.1 (Johnson et al 1993a) and INTERLINE 5.0 (Johnson et al 1993b), respectively. For both truck and rail, the route characteristics that are most important to the radiological risk assessment include the total shipping distance between each origin-destination pair and the fractions of travel in rural, suburban, and urban zones of population density.…”