ML20010C360
| ML20010C360 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 07109148 |
| Issue date: | 07/31/1981 |
| From: | Macdonald C NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| To: | Munro J EECTECHO |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8108190403 | |
| Download: ML20010C360 (2) | |
Text
u
]lM/$$
W hv.
f,(Y)Ceb W
JUL 311981
) 9G -S 5 FCTC:R110 71-9148 Qb DL/ s j
i c)
Q.f i?
cN 8 5
/
IE.
?i 1
L, &
\\ -- t # < g [,3 Technical Operations e-f
/'j!
ATTH: Mr. John 'J. Munro, III ef 40 North Avenue
% ' < '_- j d
/ /
Ac[/
Burlington, MA 01803
\\ /,,
's
\\p,e y 'N..
Gentlemen:
This refers to your application dated March 24, 1981, requesting approval of the Model No._770 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 requesteo by this letter should be submitted in the fo;c of revised pages.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, we would be pleased to meet with you and your staff.
Sincerely.
OrigiralS!;asd by R. H. 0:teZaarden Charles E. MacDonald, Chief Transportation Certification Branch Division of Fuel Cycle and Material Safety, !NSS
Enclosure:
As stated Distribution: w/ encl RH0degaarden (2)
ZMcDonald Docket File NRC PDR IE ilQ (3)
FCTC R/F NMSS R/F J Faw G) 9108190403 810731 PDR ADOCK 07109148
- C POR _
= N...
.E.W.l......$...f. 0W.kf l
sumSpdegaarden: alm CEMacDonaldfy cw
.l l
om h ilh)8N
' ibfl8 lfs
[
i 1
1 NRC FORM 318 (10-80) NRCM O240 OFFICIR RECORD COPY
~
4 Model No. 770 Packaging Docket No. 71-9148 Enc 1 to ltr dtd:JUL 3 1 1981 1.
For the hypothetical free drop, Part 71 requires striking the unyielding surface in a position for which maximum damage is expected.
The SAR showed that two, 30-foot free drops were conducted, one in a flat bottom drop, the other in a slightly tilted bottom drop.
However, for the package design, it seems that a corner drop or a top drop has potential causing more damage on the package than a bottom drop in which the impact energy is unifomly absorbed by the square tubings. Demonstrate that the package will survive a corner drop or a top drop.
2.
According to page 2-5 of the SAR, the puncture impact was done on the end plate (once on each end plate), but it was described in page 2-8 that the impact was on the cover plate.
Clarify the puncture tests performed. Show that the test performed was the worst case.
3.
The shear load capability of the tie-down device was estimated, but it was not analyzed under a load combination of 2, 5, and 10 G's as required by 10 CFR 571.31.
If the eye bolts are to be tied dwn by using slings, they should be so analyzed so that the maximum combined stress in the eye bolts or in any other part of the package should not exceed yield strength of the mate 1al. The shear strength is more widely accepted as six-tenth of tne tensile strength instead of 75%.
4.
On both the outer and inner containers, indicate the size and location of the vent holes referred to in 53.5.1.
Please indicate the size and type of welds on Drawing fio. 77093, Sheet 2 of 6.
OFFICE k sum ut) o.u k i
- l""C"
OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
_ _ ___ _ _____J N"c'""
_ _ _ _ _