ML20033C413

Forwards Request for Addl Info Re 810618 Application for Approval of Model HN-100,Series 3

ML20033C413
Person / Time
Site:	07109151
Issue date:	11/13/1981
From:	Macdonald C NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS)
To:	Mallory C HITTMAN NUCLEAR & DEVELOPMENT CORP. (SUBS. OF HITTMAN
References
NUDOCS 8112030138
Download: ML20033C413 (3)

Text

,

m

~

)l93j 3/3 u e n

% A(th cktku.

t NOV 131981 3 % -TS FCTC: RHO

(< ' g ', L. ' ~)

~ 71-9151 4-.~

l eo

• n. g,J 6

g Hittman Nuclear & Development' Corp.

M '

ATTN: Mr. Charlss W. Mallory

+

9190 Red Branch Road Columbia, MD 21045 Gentlemen:

This refers to [our application dated June 16.-1981, as amended October 20,1981,- requesting approval of the Model No. HN-100 Series 3

-packaging.

In connection with our review, we need the infomation identified in the enclosure to this letter.

Please advise us within thirty (30) days from the date of this letter when this infomation will be provided. The additional information requested by this letter should be submitted in the fonn of revised pages.

If you have any questions regarding this matter, we would be' pleased to meet with you and your staff.

Sincerely,

[s s.

CDC Charles E. MacDonald, Chief Transportation Certification Branch Division of Fuel Cycle and Material Safety,IMSS

Enclosure:

As stated Distribution: w/enci

-RH0degaarden (2)

HWLee

~

Docket File NRC PDR

'IEHQ(3)

NMSS R/F

-FCTC R/F 8112030138 011113 151 PDR ADOCK 07109 M C

p

_,u e

omer,..i.... C..T.C.....

....F..C.TC. q(

FC p

i S"#3. e.gaar, den,,a,' in,,W,L,e e,,,,,,

CEMak id

..1.! /.p/8.i..,.. 11/13/81...,..11(g/81 NRC FORM 318 (10-80) NRCM O240 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY

l,

.A.

}

i Hittman Nuclear & Development Corp.

HN-100 Series 3 Cask Docket No. 71-91 51 NOV 131981 Enc 1 to ltr dtd:

'a,.

General' 1.

In a note on the drawing specify the standards'and procedures to be followed in the testing and certification of the A516 Grade 70 steel used in the outer shell' to have a minimum yield strength of 49,000 psi.

1 2.-

Indicate the material and dimensions of the stop that protects the

' lid gaskets in Sections A-A and B-B on Drawing No. C001-5-9138.

3.

Explain how the cask is sealed at the location of Item 9 as shown l

in Detail A on Drawing No. C001-5-9139.

4.-

Using standard weld symbols of AISC, indicate the type and size of welds on the lifting and tie-down lugs on Drawing No. C001-5-9143.

5.

Provide a note on the drawing specifying the specifications, standards, and processes used for welds.

i,.

6.

Identify on the drawings the reference drawing numbers for the items and

{

details shown on Drawing Nos. C001-5-9143 and C001-5-9144.

Analysis._

l 1.

Provide an analysis to show that failure of the tie-down devices under excessive loads will not result in any loss of packaging effectiveness or release of radioactive materials.

In the analysis, 4

i the welds should be assumed to be 100% effective. Both the lifting and the tie-down lug welds should be considered in the analysis.

1 2.

Revise the design calculations of the lifting and tie-down device as follows:

1

[

(a)

In the analysis which assumes the tie-down lugs are used as lifting lugs (53.1.3.4), in addition to bending moment and shear, there exists a twisting moment equal to the lifting force times the offset distance from the shear center of the lugs. This twisting moment should be considered in your j

evaluation.

h e

' *"'cc >

............... ~

. ~ ~.. ~ ~..

~~

~ ~ ~. ~ ~..

. ~..... -

.. ~ ~ ~. ~

.... ~. - ~.

~...... ~ ~

... ~.....

~..

~.

~

.................. ~

............ ~.. ~

..... ~ ~.. ~.

~~.~.~.~

..... - -. ~.

.oc row m OFFICIAL-RECORD COPY

6 i -

i

~

(b) In Section 3.1.4.2, i.he numbers "75.95" and "12.48" us' d to a

compute T + T, should have been "69.8" and "12.0," respectively.

j (c)

In Section 3.1.4.4, the moment resistance of welds should be computed with respect'to the neutral axis of the welds.

3.

It is unrealistic to assume that the total energy due to the one 4

foot free drop is absorbed by the 4" thick steel bottom plate without considering the actual stress distributions and effect on the cask. The cask itself is far less rigid than the bottom plate.

Provide a re-evaluation of the cask due to the one foot dmp. The analysis should also consider the welds joining the cask body and the bottom plate.

i 4.

The one foot drop on top corner at the ratchet binder has been evaluated for a deceleration force of 12g's. We would expect a 4

steel cask dropped one foot onto an essentially unyielding surface to experience a much higher impact force than 12g's. Provide a detailed analysis for the top corner drop at the ratchet binder which detemines the impact force and the deceleration.

4 j

i i

b d

i i

i 4

F 4

1 OFFICE k

[ EU;tNAME k DATEk

nne rono si no..o, secu o2' OFFICIAL RECORD COPY

.