ML19289E028
| ML19289E028 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 07109132 |
| Issue date: | 03/05/1979 |
| From: | Macdonald C NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| To: | Simchuk J NUCLEAR PACKAGING, INC. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7903210368 | |
| Download: ML19289E028 (4) | |
Text
.
~
,c[
<,8*
UNITE D STATES
- f.,
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMisslON f
j WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 C
%wj g
%, +....f MAR 0 51979 v
FCTR: RHO 71-9132 Nuclear Packaging, Inc.
ATTN:
Mr. John D. Simchuk 1733 South Fawcett Tacoma, WA 98402 Gentlemen:
This refers to your application dated October 20, 1978 requesting approval to deliver the Model No. T-3 packaging to a carrier for transport.
In connection with our review, we need the information identified in the enclosure to this letter.
Please advise use within thirty (30) days from the date of this letter when this information will be provided. The additional information requested by this letter should be submitted in the form of revised pages to the original Safety Analysis Report in order to preserve the continuity of your application.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, we will be pleased to meet with you and your staff.
Sincerely, f
L i
nar es E. MacDonald, Chief Transportation Branch Division of Fuel Cycle and Material Safety
Enclosure:
As stated 7903 2;o d33 3G8
MODEL NO. T-3 SHIPPING PACKAGE locket No. 71-9132 Encl to 1tr dtd STRUCTURAL 1.
Revise Section 1.1.2 of the application to explicitly state the allowable stresses that will be permitted in various cask components under Normal and Accident Test Conditions. Justify that the stated values are adequate as a basis for design of a spent fuel cask.
2.
Revise Sections 1.6 and 1.7 of the application to include a structural evaluation of the cask showing explicitly that none of the Normal or Accident Condition Tests in 10 CFR 71 would produce larger stresses in the various components than the allowable values specified in Section 1.1.2.
Also, note that the evaluation of the one-foot free drop (Section 1.6.6) does not show that the package meets the requirements of 10CFR571.35.
3.
State whether the lead shie' ding is bonded to the inner and outer shells and evaluate the cask for lead slump under Normal and Accident Test Conditions.
Note that the structural evaluation of the cask under Normal and Accident Test Conditions (item 2, above) should consider the shell stresses (if any) produced by differential thermal expansion or contraction (radial and longi-tudinal) during fabrication (e.g., lead-pour / cool-down).
4.
Show that the steel components will be adequately resistant to brittle fracture at cold temperatures when the cask is subjected to the Normal and Accident Test Conditions in 10 CFR 71.
- Also, 0
specify any standards for minimum Charpy value at -40 F or maximum nil-ductility transition temperature that will be used as a basis for accepting or rejecting materials used to fabricate containment vessel components.
5.
Show that the containment vessel closures are adequate to maintain a seal throughout the Normal and Accident Condition Tests specified in 10 CFR 71.
Specify the preloads that will be applied to the fasteners in the containment vessel closures.
Describe the procedure that will be used to assure the actual preloads in operation will be within the range intended by the designer.
Show tnat the design / operating procedures are adequate to assure the closure fasteners will not experience a fatigue failure.
b 6.
The SAR should include an evaluation of a 30-foot side drop of the package, with the trunnions oriented downwards.
7.
Show that the tie-down system is adequately designed to acccmmodate differential thermal expansion between the package and the vehicle.
8.
Revise the package drawings to include ?.e following:
a) Weld inspection requiremente b) Bolt clearance holes, tap lengths and thread engagement lengths or reference the industry standards that will be followed c) Push-plug material, dimension, and tolerances d) Details which clearly show the clearar.ces and tolerances of the bolt holes and step joint dimensions which prevent the closure fasteners from being loaded by lateral inertia forces from the covers.
e) Sun shield.
9.
The SAR should include an evaluation of the puncture test considering the end of the cask to impact the 6-inch pin following a 30-foot drop test of the package onto the same end (i.a., impact limiter in deformed condition prior to puncture test).
Note tnat log to base "e" rather than to base "10" should be used ;o evaluate the equation for St on page 1-115. Also, note tha t:
a) There appears to be no mechanism to provide an edge moment reaction as assumed in the plate analyses on pages 1-115 and 1-117.
b) The plastic stress criteria on page 1-117 is not included in Section 1.1.2 and has not been justified in the SAR.
c) The SAR does not show that deflection of the outer closure plates would be sufficiently limited to avoid loads being imposed onto the containment vessel closures.
, Miscellaneous Provide a discussion of the effects of fuel element or other secondary container residual sodium assuming water in-leakage.
CONTAINMENT Revise 53.2 to consider fuel pin failure under Normal Conditions of Transport.
The analysis in 52.5.4 should be revised to show the derivation of th" 30.5 in 3 of free volume per fuel pin.
This derivation shou'J include initial pin pressurization, free volume STP, and fi al gas pressurization.
au CRITICALITY 1.
Provide the dimensioned geometric models used in calculating the keff values given in Table 5.4.
Identify material regions used in geometric models.
2.
Resolve inconsistency between requested 5.0 kg fissile fuel ioading and loadings reported in Table 5.2.
Also, verify fuel loadings in Table 5.2 against geometric model (requested in 1 above) and fuel densities given in Table 5.3.
3.
Provide copies of input data and output data (not complete computer printout) for the most reactive keff calculation for NITAWL, XSDRN, and KENO computer programs.
ACCEPTANCE TESTS AND MAINTENANCE PROGRAM 1.
Revise 97.1.2 and 17.2.2 taking into consideration the requirements of 10 CFR 571.53(b).
2.
Revise 67.2.1 to provide for leak testing prior to each shipment, i.e., Item 21, page 6-4.