ML19322E449
| ML19322E449 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 07105086 |
| Issue date: | 03/04/1980 |
| From: | Macdonald C NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| To: | Kirk W UNITED NUCLEAR CORP. (SUBS. OF UNC, INC.) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8003280113 | |
| Download: ML19322E449 (2) | |
Text
.
~
f
'o,,
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3
o WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 cg
%,".....,/
MAR 0 41990 FCTC: RHO 71-5086 United Nuclear Corporation ATTN: Mr. William F. Kirk 67 Sandy Desert Road Uncasville, CT 06382 Gentlemen:
This refers to your application dated December 20, 1979, requesting an amendment for the Model No. UNC-2600 packaging.
In connection with our review, we need the information identified in the enclosure to this letter.
Please advise us within thirty (30) days from the date of this letter when this information will be provided. The additional information should be incorporated into a consolidated application without reference to previous submittals.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, we will be pleased to meet with you and your staff, s
Sincerely, d%
e Charles E. 4acDonald, Chief Transportation Certification Branch Division of Fuel Cycle and Material Safety
Enclosure:
As stated O
Q s008280 1in
A United Nuclear Corporation Model No. UNC-2600 Packaging Enc 1 to ltr dtd: MAR 0 4 1980 1.
The drawings provided in the submittal are not appropriate for incor-poration into a Certificate of Compliance. Less detailed drawings are needed for this purpose. The drawings should be revised to consolidate the pertinent information onto a smaller number of sheets.
The revised drawings should show the general arrangement of the package, the materials of. construction, and the design features and dimensions that are important to safe performance of the package. To the extent practicable, more detailed information (e.g., tolerances; radii of curvature, details of ancillary components, etc.) should be omitted from the drawings unless this information is related to safety.
2.
Verify that the revised drawings are consistent in all respects with the packaging that was subjected to the 30-foot drop test and the puncture test.
If not, identify any differences and show that the modified package would meet the requirements of 10 CFR 71.
3.
Clarify the extent to which the d. rum cover was damaged as a result of the 30-foot side drop test (e.g., did the cover ssparate from the drum).
Evaluate the effects of a subsequent 40-inch puncture test onto the end of the package with the 6-inch diameter pin striking the closure of the inner container.
e e
O I
I a
9
~
"w d -
-