ML20057A837

Application for Renewal of Certificate of Compliance 9019 for Model BU-7 Package

ML20057A837
Person / Time
Site:	07109019
Issue date:	09/14/1993
From:	Winslow T GENERAL ELECTRIC CO.
To:	Haughney C NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS)
References
NUDOCS 9309160003
Download: ML20057A837 (260)

Text

{{#Wiki_filter:NF&CM Wilmington, NC CONSCiLIDATED APPLICATION September 14, 1993 Model BU-7 Shi;ning Container NRC Certi:'icate 0:' Comaliance USA /9019/AF g gar" 8882 a?qp

)- GENuclear Energy. i _L__ i 1 Mam ', \\?u %y fr r>! a (/ '. liNij J y t

/ y 1 t-n k m wn, o:t r w se se i

i September 14, 1993 - i l 9 Mr. Charles J. Haughney, Chief Transportation Certification Branch Division of Fuel Cycle & Material Safety U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555

Dear Mr. Haughney:

J

Subject:

Request for Renewal of Certificate - Consolidated Application (Includes Boral Liner Request)

References:

(1) Certificate of Compliance USA /9019/AF, Model BU-7 Shipping Package, Docket 71-9019 (2) Consolidated Application, TP Winslow to CE MacDonald, 1/27/93 (3) Supplement, TP Winslow to CE MacDonald, () 3/4/93 .) General Electric Company's Nuclear Fuel & Components Manufacturing (NF&CM) facility hereby requests renewal of NRC _j Certificate of Compliance Number 9019 for the Model No. BU-7 packaging. This consolidated application replaces the one submitted on 1/27/93 as supplemented on 3/4/93 in its entirety. In support of this request, I am providing a consolidated application that incluces (1) the criticality information and justification for the addition of a Boral liner in the inner container that will allow higher masses to be shipped and (2) ~ the criticality safety information that allows for the shipment of lower masses without the liner. i In both situations (with and without the liner) the quantities i are show-to remain subcritical under accident conditions for an array of packages assuming water in-leakage into the inner container and assuming the oxide is released from the product pails but retained in'the inner container.

0 J

) gl 160038 l LD 1

() Mr. C. J. Haughney September 14, 1993 Page 2 Attachment l' describes the changes made to the current approved licensing drawing. . provides a listing of the changes being requested from the existing application by page and section of the new consolidated application. is the consolidated application. The following are proposed wording changes for the Certificate of Compliance by Condition. The additional wording is provided below in a bold type to facilitate review. Wording that has been removed is indicated by an asterisk in the right-hand column. Condition

5. (a) (2)

Description 1 The packaging consists of up to two 5-gallon or up l O to three 3-gallon, 11.25-inch-ID, minimum 24-gauge steel pails contained in a 13.75-to 14.05-inch-diameter by nominal 27-inch-long inner container constructed of 18-gauge minimum or 14-gauge maximum steel, with bolted and gasketed (1/8-inch thick silicone rubber) top flange closure. The inner container is centered and s supported in a 22.5-inch-ID, 18 gauge steel, 55-gallon capacity, DOT Specification 17H or UFC Rule 40 steel drum by solid, insulating material composed of fire-retardant phenolic foam (7-9 pounds per cubic foot). Drum closure is provided by a DOT Specification 17H, 16-gauge drum cover drilled and threaded for 5/8-inch-diameter bolt and nut. The maximum weight of the package is 370 l pounds.

5. (a) (3)

Under certain situations, as described in Condition 5. (b) (2), a liner containing Boral is located inside the inner container.

5. (a) (4)

Drawing The container is constructed in accordance with General Electric Company Drawing No. 112D1592, ( Revision 11. _. ~

-() Mr. C. J. Haughney September 14, 1993 cage 3 Condition t

5. (b) (1)

Type and Form of Material

5. (b) (1) (i)

Uranium oxide powder enriched to not more than 5.0 w/o in-the U-235 isotope. The maximum H/U atomic ratio shall not exceed 1.6. The mass of moderating materials within the inner container when added to the total mass of moderator within the fuel shall not exceed 1,750 grams or 5.0% of the weight of the UO, whichever is smaller. 2

5. (b) (1) (ii) Uranium oxide as pellets or a mixture of powder and pellets enriched to not more than 4.10 w/o in the U-235 isotope.

The maximum H/U atomic ratio shall not exceed 0.45. The mass of moderating materials within the inner container when added to the total mass of moderator within the fuel shall not exceed 1,000 grams or 5.0% of the weight of the UO, whichever is O 2 smaller.

5. (b) (1)

Uranium-bearing materials in the form of solids, (iii) or solidified or dewatered materials. Uranium may be enriched to not more than 5.0 w/o U-235. Uranium-bearing materials may include oxides,_ carbides, silicates, or other compounds of uranium. Compounds of uranium may be mixed with other non-fissile materials. Any degree of moderation may be present. b O

Mr. C. J. Haughney September 14, 1993 () Page 4

5. (b) (2)

Maximum Quantity of Material Per Package

5. Oa) (2) (i)

For contents described in 5. Oa) (1) (i), the maximum contents per BU-7 package without the Boral liner and pail shall be limited in accordance with the following table: Maximum U-235 Maximum Uo2 Per Enrichment, Package, Without w/o Boral Liner, kgs 2.85 46.0 l 3.06 42.0 3.50 33.0 4.10 27.0 4.31 25.0 4.60 23.0 4.85 21.0 5.00 20.0

5. (b) (2) (ii) For the contents described in 5 (b) (1) (i), the maximum contents per BU-7 package with the Boral liner inserted inside the inner container shall be

() limited in accordance with the following table: Maximum U-235 Maximum UO Per 2 Enrichment, BU-7 Package With w/o Boral Liner, kgs 2.86 70.0 3.06 65.0 3.50 50.0 4.10 40.0 4.32 38.0 4.60 35.0 4.85 31.0 t 5.00 30.0

5. 03) (2)

For contents described in 5. Oa) (1) (ii), the (iii) maximum contents per BU-7 package with the Boral liner shall be limited in accordance with the following table: Maximum U0 Per 2 Maximum U-235 BU-7 Package, Enrichment, With Boral Liner w/o kgs O' 3.06 50.0 4.10 30.0 i

Mr. C. J. Haughney September 14, 1993 () Page 5 Condition

5. (b) (2) (iv) For the contents described in 5 (b) (1) (iii) :

Maximum 17.63 kg uranium per BU-7 package with the Boral liner. The total mass of contents not to exceed 74 kg. i 6. Powder or pellets may contain any quantity of gadolinium oxide, provided the total mass of uranium oxide plus gadulinium oxides does not exceed the uranium oxide mass limits in 5 (b) (2). 7. For mixtures of contents as described in

5. (b) (1) (i), ammonium oxalate and/or ammonium bicarbonate additives (or other additives in which the H/C ratio is greater than 1.0 and the total CxHy density in the additive does not exceed 0.72 grams /cm3) are permitted in the UO2 Powder to the extent that the C/U ratio does not exceed 1.27.

Conditions 8-9 should remain the same. Ten (10) copies of the submittal are provided-for your use. NF&CM personnel would be pleased to discuss this matter with you and your staff as you deem necessary. Sincerely, GE NUCLEAR ENERGY 4)se & -: 0 T. Preston Winslow, Manager Licensing & Nuclear Materials Management Enclosure /sbm cc: TPW-93-088 O t ?

1 1 O APPENDIX A DRAWING 112D1592 I " SHIPPING CONTAINER - MODEL BU-7" O f O LICENSE SNM-1097 DATE 09/14/93 PAGE DOCKET 71-9019 REVISION 0 A

2 1 l l 3 l. 4 l 9 l ..e v INSULATION PLUG 22-1/8" DIA. m 2.73 WIN. THICKNESS FlRE RETARDANT PHENOUC FOAW (20 LB/CU. FT. WIN. DENSITY) PER AEC WATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT SPECIRCATION SP-9 A AS WODIRED BY ORGOP REPORTS K/TL-729. DOT 17-H.16 CAGE COVER WTH ONE CORRUGATION NEAR THE PERIPHERY. DOT 17-H,12 GAGE CLOSURE RING WTH D FORGED LUGS, DRILLED AND THREADD FON 5/8" DIA. BOLT AND NUT. (SEE NOTE 7) 0 1/8" THICK SILICONE RUBBER CAS SPECIRCATION ZZ-R-765, CLASS OR CLASS 2o OR 2b. GRADE 50.1 INNER UD (SEE DETAIL ZONE H-1) FOUR EQUALLY SPACED I 1/O" DIA. VENT HOLES i NEAR TOP. COVERED O' WITH WATERPROOF TAPE s C ON THE INSIDE. 't FLANGE I.1-1/2" x 1-1/2* ^ "~ ) CATER TIGHT \\ ./ l SEE NOlE 1 / /" PHENOUC FOAW INSULATION (1 N CU. FT.) PHENOUC FOAW SH; \\K AEC WATERIALS AND EQUIPWEi Nh j,h AS WODIRED BY ORGDP REP 01 g. SEE NOTE 13 MD 14 N '%N 55 GALLON, DOT 17-H OR hK 18 CAGE STEEL DRUW, IDENTIRCATION PLATE i \\ 1/16" STAINLESS STEEL l / ~% ~' (SEE NOTES 5 & 6) q g E Q Qy 1 J N INNER ORUW l SEE NOTE 12 ^ ^ - SEE NOTE 2 dRUW F \\ p 5/8" WAX. DIA. THRU - 1$ l LD. OF INNER CONTAINER I C I \\ 9/16" WAX. DIA. THRU (12) DIA. B.C. HOLES g ~T EO. SPACED ON A 15 3/4 13.75 s I 17* O.D. \\l \\ WELD f.D. g N_ + l g 17" DI A.1 ( 1/2" DtA. M AX. 1 I 12 HOLES i INNER UD 3/16" THICK STL PLATE CASKET FLANGE j i f I 2 I t i 4 l J

6 l 7 j g l 9 l eE3 % HEC W C 112D1592 h==== =. g g Irs sssis s e u =- " = = ~ - """ c, "" T"'"~ 11201592 SK?P!NG CONTAJNER-MODEL BU-7 + NOTES: UCEM9NG DRAWNO

1. PRKR TO ORST USE. LEAK TIGHTNESS IS WRIFlED BY A "N BUBBLE TEST AT 15.0 F9G, heNNAmt TEST

7. AmX TAMPDt SAFE SEAL TO THE S/8" OIA. BOLT Put IS CONOUCTID USNG TK SUCCHE RUDOER CONTANER THE REQUREhDTS OF 10 WR 71.43 (b).

CASKET AS TT ONLY SEAUNC ACD;T BETVCEN FLANCE AND COVDt.

8. TORQUE fMNER CONTANER BOLTS TO 150 INCH-P0utos (WNWUW), WAKMUW TORQUE NOT TO EXCIID

2. CONWXITY OF BOTTOW HE AD 3/8" WN. TO 3/4* WAX.

264 INCH-POUNDS.

3. CAMTY DEPTH REQUtRED TO ACCOWCOATE PRODUCT E WNMUW W 6 SK TO BE N6 MUM wAU.

CONT M M THCXNESS. WEID AT DOTTOW OF 1 1/2* ANGLI IS rop OPTIONAL A)O WAY BE NTERWITTENT OR 360".

4. ALL FABR9CAtl0N AND W AC>sNtNG DIXNSIONS ARE NChitNAL UNLESS OTERilRSE INDICAlED.

10. W6 G FM M TO DE WDN & EXPOSED BOTTOW DOUBLE SEAW.

5. IDENTIFICATION PLATE TO BE RfVETED TO THE OUTER CONTADO WlH 1/8" DLA STAMES3 STEEL BUND RIVETS, Il* b U

^ (ET PER TALID WW R00W NERATURE M>LCANIDNG, (RW) la OR Ib. GRADE 50. UN "U'

12. OUTER DRUW CAN HAVE eft 6 (2) OR (3) ROLUNG

)UROMETER HARDNESS 45 TO 75)

6. PERW ANENTLY MARK BY ENCRAMNG, ETCHING, OR WET AL STAMP USNG 1/2* (WNWUW) CH AR ACTERS, PER

13. TTKNAL BORAL UNER INSERT TO BC USED IN 10 CTR 71.85 (c).

ACCORDANCE WITH PROVISIONS OF NRC CERTir1CATE.

14. WINMUW OF YWO UFTING HOLES WTH STAINLESS STEEL EM INSERTS AT APFROXMATELY 180* APART LOCATED N TOP 1/2" 0F UNER. UNER SETttAL NUWBE.R LOCATED ON 10. OF NdER STANtISS 4 80 M

DETAll A u 3/16* STEEL 131/2 M AX O D. X 26*g $I MIN 1WUW HDGHT N A n n iyu u L. .y CARD IRE RET.) (7-9 LBS. PER L NLL 3E IN ACCORDANCE WTH I JT SPEClOCATION SP-9 OR ( ,L; t ( ) p* 1TS CC/TL-729. y + :r: "[~ .o 27 25 4 26.75 SEE NOTE 3 - i rC RULE C0 INSIDE DI A. 35.750 34.625 ~ HEIGHT WTH ~ -4 COWR OFT BOR AL - 080" W N THtCKKSS B10 AREAL DENSITY = 011 GRAWS/Chl WiNIMUW [_l 22 GAUGE _i 300 SERIES STANLISS STEEL ~ (2 PLACES)

• j 1

WAxwuu cap oETwtEN - l X. DORAL HALVIS NOT TO ~ I EXCLED 1/5' ~ ' PLCS. ~ DETAIL A -l PLCS 180* AP ART ~ - 1 5/16*-18 ulN./ 7/16*-14 M AX- - l EQUIPMENT CL ASS CODE E~ STL BOLT AND WASHER ""5 (12 EA REQ'D ) SAFETY - RELATED n l R. saw 7la DoAg 3 l R.N. ANIXR$0N ZUT Mcw442 PECN-733 MCN 682 10/1S/64 l 8 l A DDAK 4 l A A ZOAA K02 I PrcN-73e s/is/sa McN-e97 4/24/a5 DR-5 l e l A zios SlA 20Ax Pf 06 742 3/20/90 MCH-709 9/30/06 l to { R ST1DNE 6 l4 TOAK ncN m etcN-72o . 3' 0 f 6 0 _. _- e a_w ~ Ti m m 3-n TJ

112D1592, l

b y o

s.J APPENDIX B " TEST REPORT FOR MODEL BU-7 BULK URANIUM SHIPPING CONTAINER" APRIL 25, 1980 0 LICENSE SNM-1097 DATE 09/14/93 PAGE DOCKET 71-9019 REVISION O B i l

.a-g -o - -. +, u TEST REPORT FOR MODEL BU-7 BULK URANIUM SHIPPING CONTAINER ] In accordance with criteria for compliance with CFR49,- paragraph 173.398 and 10CFR, pa ragraphs 71.31, 71.32 I 71.35-and 71.36 ( r General Electric Co. Nuclear Energy Traffic Operation San Jose, California DATE ISSUED April 25, 1980 i 1 I i

TEST REPORT FOR MODEL BU-7 BULK URANIUM SHIPPING CONTAINER

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 TEST DESCRIPTION Normal and Hypothetical accident condition tests were conducted on General Electric Model BU-7, Bulk Uranium Shipping Containers in accordance with 10CFR71, " Packaging of Radioactive Materials for Transport and Transportation of Radioactive Material Under Certain Cor.ditions." The tests were conducted at the Wilmington Manufacturing Department facility on March 20th and 21st 1980, and April 1st and 2nd 1980. The BU-7 Container is intended to be a fissile class I shipping container for shipment of enriched uranium powder. 1.2 PACKAGING DESCRIPTION Inner containment is a nominal 16-gallon drum closed by a gasketed-O- bolted lid, centered and supported within an outer 55-gallon drum by a solid insulating media, and containing two steel pails which contain UOp. (See Drawing 112D5231A and Figure 1.) l. 2.1. Outer Container A nominal 55-gallon, Uniform Freight Classification Rule 40,18 gauge steel drum with nominal outside dimensions of 22.82" diameter by 36.5" high. Fourl/4" holes near the top of the container are provided for venting and are covered with waterproof tape. The cover is flat 18 gauge s teel. The closure ring is 12 gauge steel with 5/8" bolt meeting DOT Specification 17H. 1.2.2. Inner Container 3 A nominal 16-gallon drum constructed of 18 gauge steel, modified by welding a closure flange to accept a 3/16" thick steel lid. The lid is gasketed for resistance to high temperature and attached with twelve 5/16" steel bolts. The inside dimensions are 13.75" diameter by 27" high. 1.2.3. Insulation The 16-gallon inner containment drum is centrally held within the outer container by, and the space between the two drums is completely filled with, solid fire-retardant ^ phenolic foam per USAEC Specification SP-9.

1.2.4. Product Container Two closed 5-gallon containers fabricated of 24 gauge steel, vertically stacked in each BU-7 container. i 1.2.5. Test Weight Each 5-gallon pail contained 45 kgs (99 pounds) of natural 002 powder. Total test weight including weight of the 5-gallon pails is 209 pounds. Gross weight of the BU-7 is between 365 and 375 pounds, depending on variations in weights of BU-7 container populations. Actual gross weight of the two 5-gallon pails as recorded on the computer weigh sheets was 94.81 kgs (209 pounds) for container S/N K0174, and 95.29 kgs (210 pounds) for container S/N kl878). 2.0 TESTING 2.1 TEST

SUMMARY

The test program consisted of a combination of normal and hypothetical e accident condition tests as described in 10CFR71 Appendix A and B. Three BU-7 containers were utilized in the tests. They were taken from the G.E. inventory of containers at Wilmington and are built to same specifications as all model BU-7 Containers. Serial numbers and tests they were subjected to is as follows: ' CONTAINER SERIAL TEST CONDITION NUMBER TESTED WATER SPRAY TEST K0319 DROP TEST 4 FT. K0319 Normal Cond. tests PENETRATION TEST K0319 COMPRESSION TEST K0319 30 FEET FREE DROP K0174 Kl878 Hypothetical Accident PUNCTURE TEST K0174 K1878 Cond tion THERMAL TEST Kl878 WATER IMMERSION TEST K1878 Container No. K0319 was used only for the normal test conditions. K0174 was drop tested 30 feet impacting on the bottom seam, then puncture tested. Container S/N K1878 was drop tested 30 feet impacting on the closure ring, then subjected to all remaining hypothetical accident conditions, that were applied sequentially in the order indicated in 10CFR71 Appendix B, to determine their cumulative effect on the package. All tests were monitored by General Electric Fuel Quality Control Engineering, and certified O there completion per test check sheets in the Appendix. i

i 2.2 LOADING 2.2.1 Hypothetical Accident Loading Containers K0174 and Kl878 were loaded with approximately 45 kilogram:s (99 pounds) of natural 002 powder, in the Fuel Mancfacturing Operation (FMO) powder pack facility, i using e corrputer controlled loading and accountability system, see figures ( 2 and 3) the computer punch cards retrained with the 5 gallon pails of powder during the s tests. (Loading Record Sheets and Request Sheet.are in the Appendix). 2.2.2 Normal Condition loading Container Serial No. K0319 was loaded with lead shot weighing 93 Kg's (205 pounds) gross weight. s 2.2.3 Moisture Content Moisture content analysis of the natural uranium powder was made before and afLEr the Hypothetical accident tests. 2.3 NORMAL CONDITION TESTS NOT CONDUCTED r The following normal conditions tests were not conducted because their requirements have been satisfied for the following reason: ' Heat: Temperature of 130*F is within normal operating range for materials of construction. i Cold: Temperature of -40"F is within normal operating range for materials of construction. ' Reduced Pressure: Successfully passed this requirement in prior tests. (See GE Packaging Engineering test report dated 2/10/78).

• Vibration:

Ccntainers of this type have withstood years of tr.ansport with no occurences of significant damage due to normal vibration. ' Corner Drop: Not required since package weight exceeds 110 pounds. i

3.0 TEST RESULTS 3.1 Normal Condition Tests. (container S/N 0319) 3.1.1 Water Spray Test Container was exposed to a water spray sufficiently heavy to keep all exposed surface except the bottom wet for a period of 30 minutes. (See Fig. 4). RESULT There were no signs of water damage to the package. 3.1.2 Four Foot Drop Test The container, loaded with 205 pounds of test weight was dropped four feet with the closure ring impacting onto a flat reinforced concrete pad. Test was conducted 2 hours after water spray test. (See Fig. 5). RESULT There was a slight deformation of the outer container closure ring that did not impair its function. No damage to the inner container seal or the 5 gallon pails. 3.1. 3 Penetration Test Container was penetration tested by impacting the c' hemispherical end of a vertical steel cylinder 1-1/4 inches in diameter and weighing 13 pounds and dropped from a height of 40 inches into the top of the container where it is most susceptible to a projectile penetration. (See Fig. 6). RESULT There was a slight indentation where the 13 pound bar struck the container. It did not penetrate the package. 3.1.4 Compression Test Weight equal to more than 5 times the weight of the package be applied to top of the containers for a period of 24 hours. (Minimum weight for BU-7 is 5 times 375 pounds, or 1,875 pounds). Test weight used was 2,440 pounds (See Fig. 6). RESULT No damage due to compression loading. O

3.2 Hypothetical Accident Condition Tests The hypothetical accident condition tests were conducted in the sequence specified in Appendix B to 10CFR71, to evaluate the ability of the package to withstand cumulative damage of the four tests. To establish the drop orientation that covers the most severe damage, two containers (S/N K1878 and K0174 were selected at random, then one (k1878 was dropped on its top clssure ring and the other (Serial Nc.. K0174), impacted on the bottom seam as these are the ones most likely to create a breach; impact angle of both tests was approximately 45*. After completion of_ the drop test, both containers were puncture tested, then container S/N K1878 was subjected to the thermal and water immersion tests. 3.2.1 Free Drop The packages were raised by a crane to a 30 foot height at approximately a 45* angle as shown in figure 7. The height was determined by a measured, weighted cord hanging from the containers. A quick release mechanism was used to drop the packages, which fell of the containers (See Fig. 8 and 9)g on the corners at approximately a 45" angle, landin RESULT O Both containers impacted at the pre-determined angles. Areas at points of impact of both units were without fracture. Beyond this, the only significant damage was a slight opening of the cover where the closure ring of container No. K-1878 was deformed, as shown in Figures 10 thru 14. The bottom corner free fall test of container K0174 caused somewhat more crushing of the container than was experienced in the top drop. There was no evidence of fractures or separation of the containers side from the bottom (See Fig.15 and 16) therefore the container with the slight opening due to the top drop was deemed to have suffered the maximum damage. Past test inspection showed N0 damage to the sealing features of the inner container or to the 5 gallon pails. 3.3.2 PUNCTURE TEST Containers K-1878 and K-0174 were free dropped through a distance of 40 inches, striking the top end of a vertical steel bar mounted on a reinforced concrete pad. The bar was fabricated per the requirements of 10CFR71, Appendix B (See Fig.17). A vertical drop with the container impacting on the 18 gauge cover near the outer edge was considered the most vulnerable orientation to puncture. i

l 3.3.2 PUNCTURE TEST (cont.) RESULT Both packages were slightly' indented about 1/4 inch, there was no puncture of either container. (See Figures 18 and 19). 3.2.3 THERMAL TEST A Thermal Test of container No. K-1878 followed the 30 foot free drop and puncture tests. The thermal test conducted required exposure to an environment of 1475* minimum for a period of 30 minutes. Since an actual gasoline fire with open flames provides the most realistic means of satisfying the requirements of 10CFR70 thermal test, this method was chosen for the BU-7 test. Test set up as shown.in Fig. 20 was used. The gasoline and water supplies were located 100 feet from the fire pan. A thermocouple mounted on the closure ring adjacent to the slight opening of the container lid was monitored using a Honeywell Model R7353A Dial-0-Troll. Serial No. 7812-3849, which was calibrated using a West millivolt pot that has traceability to the National Bureau of Standards. The eight foot square fire kit with container mounted 3 feet O' above the surface allowed for approximately 2 feet of. flames around all sides of the container. By using the open gasoline fire, the emissivity and absorbtion coefficients were in accordance with those specified in 10CFR71. Appendix B.

3. 2. 3.1 Test Procedure Approximately 200 gallons of water were fed into the pit resulting in a water level of 5 inches.

Approximately 50 gallons of gasoline were then fed into the steel fire pit to form a layer of fuel about one inch deep on top of the water surface. After ignition, (See Fig. 21) the fuel and water supplies were turned on and manually controlled to one gallon per minute of water and 5.8 GPM of fuel to maintain a fire that completely enveloped the BU-7 Container. Figures 22 thru 31 are random photographs taken during the test. The temperature measured on the surface of the test container increased rapidly to 1475' F. (See Figs. 32 and 33) and exceeded that throughout the test with a maximum T temperature of 2000" F. being reached. The full ) fire test continued for 42 minutes burning 300 gallons of fuel during that period.

3.2.3.1 Test Procedure (cont.) RESULTS m (] Inspection of the inner container after all the tests showed no damage to the inner container, its sealing features or to the 5 gallon pails that would yield either of them ineffective. The paint was slightly blistered in a small area at the top end of the inner container,'but no indication of this on either of the 5 gallon pails containing U02 powder. 3.2.4 Water Immersion Test After the fire test, container No. K-1878 was allowed to cool down for the prescribed period of time, and then placed in the water immersion tank (See Fig. 34) under 31/2 feet of water. One hundred and twenty pounds of weights were attached to the unit to insure that it would sink; it remained submerged for 10 hours. RESULTS Following immersion as described, container No. K 1878 was opened and inspected. The inner container was dry, the O-silicone rubber gasket was not damaged, and analysis of the UO2 powder showed there was no significant increase in the moisture content. 3.2.5 Post Test Inspection Upon completion of the four hypothetical accident condition i tests, conducted the sequence prescribed in 10CFR71, container i Serial No. K1878 was opened and inspected. As previously mentioned, there was no damage to the inner containment. l sealing features; the computer weight cards were with,the 5 gallon pails; they were not wet and there was no moisture in the inner container. (See Figures 35 thru 38). The top j insulatior, disc was badly charred (See Fig. 39) and the out-side of the bolted cover had some blistered paint, but there was no structural damage, breach of containment or loss of shielding. Post Test condition of all three containers tested is shown on Figure 40. 3.3 Acceptance Criteria Acceptance Criteria for meeting the requirements of 10CFR71 { paragraphs i 71.35 and 71.36 was as 'follows : No water intrusion to the contents. No rupture of the product containers or inner container No damage to the inner containment sealing features that would yield them ineffective. i

~3.3 Acceptance Criteria (cont.) No significant deformation to the outer container that would affect criticality safety considerations. 3.4 Conclusion All tests required by 10CFR71, have been conducted, witnessed by Quality Control Engineering and have passed the acceptance criteria. Test completion check sheets and compliance certificates'are included in the Appendix. O i O 1 -r-

' LIST OF FIGURES I i 1. BU-7 CONTAINER 2. WEIGHTING UO2 POWDER ( 3. LOADING 5 GAL. PAILS INTO BU-7 4 NORMAL CONDITION WATER SPRAY TEST 5. NORMAL CONDITION 4 FOOT DROP TEST 6. NORMAL CONDITION PENETRATION AND COMPRESSION TESTS 7. 30 FOOT DROP TEST 8. CONTAINER NO. K0174 IMPACTING ON THE BOTTOM CORNER 9. CONTAINER NO. K1878 IMPACTING ON THE CLOSURE RING 10. SERIAL NO K-1878 AFTER IMPACT 11. SERIAL NO. K-1878 AFTER IMPACT 12. SERIAL NO. K-1878 AFTER IMPACT 13. SERIAL NO. K-1878 AFTER IMPACT 14. SERIAL NO. K-1878 AFTER IMPACT 15. CONTAINER NO. K0174 AFTER 30 FOOT DROP 16. CONTAINER NO. K0174 AFTER 30 FOOT DROP 17. - CONTAINERS K-1878 AND K-0174 DURING PUNCTURE TEST 18. CONTAINER NO. K-0174 AFTER PUNCTURE TEST 19. CONTAINERS NO. K-1878 AFTER PUNCTURE TEST 20. THERMAL TEST SETUP 21. IGNITION OF FIRE TEST 22. THERMAL TEST 23. THERMAL TEST 24. THERMAL TEST 25. THERMAL TEST 26. THERMAL TEST 27. THERMAL TEST 28. THERMAL TEST 29. THERMAL TEST 30. THERMAL TEST 31. THERMAL TEST 32. HONEYWELL DIAL-0 TROLL SHOWING TEMPERATURE READING DURING THERMAL 33. HONEYWELL DI AL-0 TROLL SHOWING TEMPERATURE READING DURING THERMAL 34. WATER IMMERSION TEST 35. POST TEST INSPECTION POST TEST INSPECTION O 36. 37. POST TEST INSPECTION 38. POST TEST INSPECTION 39. CHARRED INSULATION DISC 40. CONTAINEFS AFTER COMPLETION

5/16" ST. BOLTS (QUANTITY OF 12) 3/16" THK. STL. LID PHEN 0LIC FDAM INSULATION O. GH TEMP. FIRE RET. FOAM PER USAEC RESISTANCE SPEC. SP 9.5 LB/CU.FT. 16 GAL 18 GA STL. DRUM 13.75 DI A \\ >/ w, m 27 \\ f' x\\, ? wh ((Y[ s7 O

'i s

PLUG-PHENOLIC FOAM '~~ FIRE RET. F0AM PER USAEC 5 GAL STEEL PAIL SPEC. SP 20 LB/CV. FT. 2 PAILS PER DRUM CONTAIN 002 COVER - FLAT 18 GA. STL. 55 GAL 18 GA, STL. DRUM CLOSURE RING 22.82" DIA. X 36.5" HIGH 12 GA. STL UITH 5/8 BOLTS MEETING DOT SPEC.17H FIGURE 1 BU-7 CONTAINER O

l ' M**.% m, rgp.s f u elg;Ai 'I.if [ 9 4

1. =mkrgeq7h Glkl !

A. 3 M? % 'g'& ;. ,4 f ) W3 97 i n j 1(;' v g, a a% wwwan,u;; h +anaa s s2 i, d Q $y5Eigm},$ 4 7 o . dpQ1'- 'v \\ g u. a. te. wa:$ 9 I = \\ c x? C ' s,>

g y 2

-1 .e c 1 f' ' l ' Y'fi,S';'kk() j4_ / -wpw;p.ggggp. 4/ N

c. M46Mieinslangi

.,b 8% th k aw c j>r.iididl{ml'OEl&ma e w :: ew ' M;.ic.tr[#$0gg., 1, ( "A .. g g/ - A w Jb4Mp A-s ? l .s ( it [ .y(.- il ( 2 N. ,p.. 1 l~ [ e g s g a, ai ~ ..a MP bl! b h w ~ z g: eu.a y i ~ ~ ^1 %m!6% 3 y Cr ~ x b O f. f ~"N:# i w f}g e 1 s -- iets i H a f. I "M o % ?%My{gh y

g. ;,.

she $4 Gi.. g qt ( I h7 = o f y .) l a^hs,w: 0 , YW+ 7h h w$ Eyf [ ,m,s% ,m_W.., Ip9(f,?lliW$sg'lg l~ jg:ll "VFy- -m e 3 wt. 21$4

Q m,

c ., y ;q W imp y Muumc.xac u e.w - 7,

,(n_ k .g--"~" 'I 'f 4 l I wwwm.m, N } fr. t .g \\ 1 y. p, + k; k TT j' .l ; . <4 w f. O za ~.-c s. V d$@selvv/JWiT9;1A@r% N'* k $w1b.J1 \\, N) v. .jm i la! h$ y g lC \\ L. '**W~ ,] 1l W \\ ag y 4 ^ ^ 4 %q 9 ,,.y g 5A ,1 %,<, PQQ,jgQg$&.g @Qyy ypg wi m w% 9 V y 3 y g y 9 ~8, y ,~f i_ ~ ToQdy =: .m A g/t%,, g% fj,L Q xafp .4k {l 8 3 \\ p \\ ggh4./.?gQ3y igrg#gTI y s g -} + a a g mt 0 name H,&ws w~aq$qpnnog+ak c2 + hk gv Ma:.e \\ . m%m, hbh Ng m,k x bwageh$gnhby n ~n~ .new ? ? wbhbk[h$b

y } +$ k,

h p aMhh 3$n$s%m%nea ' h .n a f k N 4 ~ $f.,M $NdMM$6m whe+Nhh-a O F + d k' a ..thk $hh2; w c,dj :4 Qh,;h) bkW.h* *y ^ + h , mb .sy s 4 p: ~ap;f-fp "l"llf%W*lY *S f,s m hh ff . A p > =,5% % w. s 3 3hhf$klhhh. 4 u w & *,,e= 1,', hU s u g a wh h, h h h fb (( k s h h, \\ ? ~f S v^; 1;e9 g r, e 1 ,.a ' gg,;au-- $$$h. g is ( ,r U U I. 7 i 3 it \\ \\- ,,..\\ \\ s r, "7 ri !

f g- - 1 %, 9 m 4-1 t-I ,1 g., L p 3 ; - n, m.-. g, 'F )&v/..I a g ~ s w,a . i, pK,*; \\c I s. : :. g t. fl. ' # j l l 1 y ~ ' Sg' Jie s y-.~y 7 2 _ f,;m.. - } _.,,,,y_.. s 1 x .....,..f I ,( t I .a, $h ,, s.... v. ^ ~ $h.: ,. : l.. ' a3. jp

)

y$-W %' ~ g-h Vg: ~~* :.' '-.. %' ~ N w,, :,c. w.q.. s,,..,. . w-

• • ?.*

.g .....,s;.s~. ~ ,s _+.... ,.a-

y.. 4

..f ~ - T :., ;;,.. ., a m., s,o..s u.;. ~ 4 : e M O' n. .. J, s, ~^ # 5 a.6 i, M,. v o ? y.. - z; w + L,w. w vpguvu..

u. ::.m tw.

s~ n. 9 %. w.>z>..n 1 ;,~ < :. - if.. :;.1,A. . w.. e.Q." - a W , :-y a...;t,.., .. c. ' %.. erg.,p,.. > c n. (WeQ %/,ge 1 D a. :. w F I G tl P E I! N O R f1 A L C O N D 1 T 1 0 il WATER SopAY TEST i m. an

O j, j !;) j -y

1 l

? l{? u l.M yh' Nei .'l' &.I I s. .,.r.re =. _ h*'

q

\\ 2 O I l i 4 l FIGUPE 5 g s NORMAL CONDITION 4 F00T DR00 TEST

~Q [{ \\ =

• M j[ ~

I({[ 5 } j V t t 4f,' U.1 I yj k [ u x:/v } ,/',., ~. f,' }! - )t pr 1 [d Ih,i ~ W iiff M M $ N__ m$ h q $.[5Eh5hg l ? f; d } -~= m A 1 i 'g%aw$fS7ApMS . 1o r

y n pukma p!p. mQ W,jg_p,m C

dMpWgf4sh w me y p o m,,4pq:' 1[M%my~w~mgw[@s d' b -d khhh v> 4n$pi:'Hv:aw m Mi % ibby n ik p %wn t m e 3, C@ssh h.w. h g,'pfg MfWg1 w g.gia :3 CFb g3 s

p Aqy IW k ;pdNkShd,M Q '.

@%n%&y@dh n C__ n%:v.:M;.a,fm ,.y e r jf *;g 4.eg.. 4.,% w*weAm. m 1 , w.s g-w bw f W4 M g 4' 4t A Ls O a : s. y g 1 1 [ \\,

n waa % a# W,~*/ 4s

$g;,m g

,., a, gW ;,;, D:

• P m

U ML % **

s. {, % -

s w; q. J , ; g,,%. % a, a.; 5,*_ \\ p '.'.' "..~- f .svs -s . '[ i -~ =* ? _, p

s. s"x 4:. %

4 '. w gg,., g ".j " y %f", (, a g /k ?P

• I '" '" ~'

T Mf h k h._ h M k_ h k 7 7 "..'"i~' g { .-r, . w,mn j . R. j. .. ~.cif y n. u, = g}., ,,m, g p _ v...7yg , p.,,, g 5 -s o _po f i ) r ' D W- <\\ fa [ m .s f y a K r;.ati ! w'TYn\\,l T. s 'i ~ s ,A g t p = g. +- t F4 f t g r J p/ c. .g o i www4 .b 1;f hs m,, e. h r ~n t y+ ;4 & +4 W:3 st;,& Q,g%+Q o g t, 8 c. ,s \\ yyy wg r o wg"b k w m "a e n c $[ 3. f Q:ds,y:!. cyag lmlc l%;j ", s't:'t I d N agap, y. Q 4,je,9;7j,4 ^ , 3., a, ?

• ~*

e

p p,

\\. ) n.f ).L 6 5 $j w 9 p. e,- x + :'s Q+y.d.. W N W; g,w.g;g '3w}ik'hk,l. ?, .n 4 ya[w@m%v. Y6 g ~ gr :ys g u N y l s , u,a t C'> l A :f \\. n w. .j,) Y 4 e w -g , p. b.;, u w u e w i 3 E.. )

s. m

) i - ._.J D ). pmgggs t m , em ; m [ m

2.-.. m-,- 2 h I tki. I. t t. } N / f I st<<. 5, Jgg j . - ~ -. - _,, _ g----{7 ~. -, . ~ ._amm s _.J, th rpqq

4. 7 m--;

-m u, j$kh f fA s -:5%, } L,., r=, m - ?:x;4 .c,. L (w, ' ' si 5 p.J, ss i M i ( f ':' ' v : o! d'i,' u m, e = a g my i n 'D'

• a hk h*hia**

R.hl M Y. 7.;n. '

k[kiQi31F"

~9 g y g km:A n, &'{?, ~W'-~ 1~- !!?2 @31.f @ifig[h"_- J ~w m -- .e p. .- w-.a %*, ,p%w-l9 'N g;g gg. T,.. - ..,.. : n.n f I. ll h [~ ' ) f 0 f) J 11 POh )[g]

1 l P, ( L .\\ j r o p kf f, t); : s .\\ f \\\\ gk, 1; t -w 5 / w -J '. _._ m ~ JA r.,,._-. ,. --mil I '*D11 %y $$ .:. - ) f=y=fJ _ CL,_--2:= I -. i. ,/ ! h $' / h '.. T 2 =r yyJ,%... = ~ 7.n. ' ~1 h ? '. "t e a.. v m // i j ' 'i, 'e !!dbdE3 e{d)$$P)%' Nis h M N 7> ' j ~ ~ 'l -d

• maatMl NN'I ljh B

f b ss --w #gw:n L.,_ _ _ A. - a. c g;5 .,,. a;' h..LYy b =- 9 i, 5 o FIGURE 8 l C0NTAINER N 0. r'0174 I M P ll C T I N G ON THE B0TTOM CORNER

--.- ~. ~ ~ --,.~. - _

, ;u

• i e

?' ' Wi s .\\ y-- ( d j- ~ j 7.. i k k }] ' 5 + l l ~ .e l r.A 4 i l a] t 1 svi', -1 s [A ' l "~,;f ' /

• yj n

3 1.. [ ,+ 3.y m., 1 g y t (e, \\. p ..y m_ f t 1 i j i 4 : +*-c. m:i4td-4t'$j[ h$$$NI4Y2h$ ..,em_, .,dse$4N:IEMD glgy i I I i F I G 11 R E 9 C 0 il T A 1. N E R N 0. 'K-187P. IMPACTING 0N T !! E CL0SURE R.1 N G

0 0 f .g e4. w 1a m, n + u i mm ~ . f. p.,f,&j)p,.q%.~ Am( h 9~ \\ ss,% 4 (j, n+ p... y,,. s-r w a MerW~ k {.yfffy.h.cQ f b:ggjpg} .. s;2* <? v.4'.%y G x f\\(ag gj. p m e%mnya,Mem m r }3 ~ . m 1l9 ewp::;fhif.,Mw; ymy lh qqfUf } Q w a a? , Ni j hyhrf p% ts Ql&y u r.. ~f [:fgfjhh@hihhhh!ggf fk hf 4 h. - / 4 nn n $n u!$ % Q; y c s,c - x: - m N

Mhs

%.J. ' b ' % p@Q & Q W M?pf( % l/ ( g-9':n % iVQ Q. k 2 )' ~ N h:m;>p %frw iMT,bx W. - 1,:y ~' 3A y% J f w PQMM Jmg~WhM.QKM ' t n ,s s,. gw w. m ' a A p{- j); y to p. g,+~rytgfyy'yyag$g,y' e!, r4M , :W+ Ys :, w t + 1 ,p o_ .. = ...m Ay m e,ga.s ,t. g $ j::. p .1 ., Y.$.. akw.hyt.X%e, J, -- ,uu -gv N*/ CO

$ rw~

5 .k.ib t .ff, Q yS. J c ' M:wS P':pM 'p z (g,51 , y

m. m N ;V -

Jt 1y - c:U I Jh { h,f sA wNe n u'?r" ' n,.V% w, &v,%gc m j j i .,; F; . ff x y p'< q p m' c s ;; y" m r.,a% m W y $ _q ;vr r t-a. .mb .o x .s E u: i m b fI l; y ~"' h ' m x *'sn @h k.h.' ' b O (F s lit t -- e-N a r-a H 3}.- M..r% p %' a WAOnH. QN;644M i n, c h9 4 &v".k k j$ h[hhh@2fd \\ A:d$ 1 t \\. c a A ny' ' ' u. n a.[~g m.a.a,m m ~- a p$ f ]v ):Qtf ~ w. My y@dy pt'If 4 j' fjs,y Cd L y pa co s 3 y I i 4- ? nt l ' / C rs m - Ah2 pb p@m. sg f, f Pf e y 3 1 y . t o# z -.-i ..n- ~ 4 .A d v s l,a \\ 5?'r Q4 ; f 5 ' s,.. 1 fL 2 s t ^* Th )'y. _gf ..( \\, n s.. s .v l ^ , ; m > u.a" g9. m... n-4 i .py, ,( ( c, r .ws g.k 1 sg.- p. +- o o t .e g. a j{4_w (,y i y ,j ;W I'd "y-

• 2 4

n . l

f f

'h,. i% \\ q ^ + \\ 9 4' g 1;

5 e@

>e n, __.J n - s> 4- -J ( 4 s., t 'v i

• .5 A
• Y 7

s-ci e k ;!. ,t e u.,

• e u

y f:-

I A

'y. 9 'fd. q. q V) e ,fj y b S y y '\\ t ) ,s 4 kW

1. p.

'O-, ppq ..i h $.S 3 MS951. + s e 44 st M %g g @gitg5kW %&& ff$%g. b %%. h. sk I 1 44 p w, pu,w.,y#w.n y, m,g. m y f ;gg y g myw re. f m 9 %+ -s e rs ty 3.m' ' a feg. -e:MW)[uw%yf 2 a @ ') f ahd%N6l dim $ 4;ik' y *'t MkeI-

• 4

-:Aww' ,.,c, s .Ja -amx-wc..

l l l l ( (e sQ s .1 _&, f,, s*, > ' ' $<,,s }:,l., s. ;: Q; v,s.b'k,.f:,' g:h &@Q y,,jP ~*% a y %. 4 h.,:p y s ,,~. z al Q, & ~ : S~ y ~s 5 \\ s . ~M. %a:.)yW+$ r. y~ s t 8 it S ~ M pQQ 'i'.{':. ,4vs> i ,p k t \\ M ('N .: a .s ,i, ,:? q,+ m yjf '; "- Q h e e' c N..'.., -t y',, % :g,. *W A W? [*k.h[$Wp sMwWW)Ma G'i syv.y ?B M [t. sn b n s.s.. ~ q, y g$, z .,,,Y s 1 iq-f5;u, e'+m 4

Wf.. A s

A % 'K;$ g {s k.i

. h

,y f) W d P f 3 d R[ k t & a,

1. -> Q. &?[w* K'.g. #v.

t x n n[)7 s l .lL. .h yf,f'-ff: j:l - 5, V, $w n My$ $ m$ W e Q @a! 3 4 s j%ywf D*J. M, m. , }hi.e' %(k }h. 'y ~*v (,?g f ' *' . m QseN ts y y y '. v r )' %! y mm m i' [e W

h. cf 1%g, g}&e %w^ms ~;.,4w, p

• sh f..

.,y% ha enmNwMh mf# M: A Q *[Q f' %,y: h t:5 c: e a M hhN a g w @w $ na$ m#,%,2' W +s QW,y r L _s l 34 Qy _f d 4 8# b ~, y W L"Q.a e $;& y w g W s W @k W p a w M M m s k Wd q %@$: h; 3.5 aW r mw & w M kN e C SIDS WMkkh w er M : w. m q W >W_M,;}QuqM&w:c,~#m wy% hhnmkw @Mm@pw w m w W hh g wh w M1 4 f n,% Tyhm J Qn Qy'm o, w g % @s W & @ 4SM h aQM B pm m W%j pk.Qlh 4m w 4a $y w k ;w %s um y 4 w a M{T%gggg 3+muQ M46 m QQg g wM u u y & w.ip,Wy n w W y #n W mpW@, %,m?.g s,w% n % $; wgg5Q%g%g%eg%%ggg f e O g a% p @$ m$ g $ g g w m QQ a m Q +% y,,Mm m y$ o QdS$n$n wan: e g g QQQ m ,w w wQ dbh6 ggq - wQ~ p@a$ .H $ny%a D cFw %e g a %ggg Q @ a% Q d gihj g @

A > l ' n g a ::; -@n

~; ; 3;; 1 4gg w g. v,2 p g wg n ga b 9 y, m..upm$ x9 y $+:g n @@ ps $ $ tgpnp -.A: an kh5 bhx % c+

, w.y,&gggfg;y

~ eg &e.uy4ym ~ m g-Wy gs e hhs y m., ~$$r%p%f,f+ W p r-o gmh g 4 C [ ~f~ {. 3g-s: p-y .L g s hhhYgdu ymi .Qy&gsy;gAn n y ga Q%4g_.f)u j),g p:q%m;sg n m3g wnwQgn gg y,g [ ,f g w w. qigW~ q u <ggegw p 9 p j,aq <-A %?$ e,N: g dpym y 6 3,,"JY?h%qy &, k'p:sWm u g H;' s , m3 m,, a,$ g .g y y:- ,2 f4 -;9p wnV3" _ L., J i! s,hk c &g. < :?w k ge j ' q@sg %~f. [f Q dn h e %ss ' g ,\\ yf - p: n g ,4

7. u A

n y,\\ p 'u 4 s$g 6 w s% m e mJy-d Q: V ^M A % m., 9 v #. ,.. ?g*.. g,x m, a a . w\\,k ) s . y ' n g ( Q;\\ ' W1-O ah- \\ y Q:+Qxs g, y .n, w-i bgf @l.> _1 < m v @M p hi t

1. f:'u-4 f

q. Wh . g ( a, y 9 1 f' +. }^p 9

1. v

4 4 Y I' w i V 1 4 1 e p L f g ii F, v: 1 s,s$ (u y.w g y o .,1 , Jg % ?$f fe f. q 9,- l

Ts,

e s i s.t A, t q;p '* *'nu. f, q 7,- n f ' hf. % f a a n$h$a ?n k h N Y, wp, y Y hW h w w 1

• ige ~.w nT en Tl

~ MP V.. s# s&s S U + feu i-4 sy..;.c ag

1. ~

[ M,ih;'[,'[$ i;p,7 Yp, $p p (( k. 1 em- . QS;g' gm a v. F'i f6A * >> J [ $ W Q $ 9 % g,y

pg s.

e d&q [N,k%gg%g;>gp% Wi OL ~ I ~ q m p r u-jf:q f r. y se r ~m #,e. N [ 4 % [h,f d d ' P r"e'n a k h.u_ k h h['i([9 uJ 'e ' I L I / R ,t..j. - ,e, -%, wt,,13 e, = w ,Yl + _ 'Q N,f, ~_ _ f ' '

f k{

y m w%^%&:~x~[s &2 -

a. i af 1 Q, R{n 'f&

a 't .g % ~ ' " ' " NL M w- _3 M. swma q kh; NDdh=d5 hgf v9am w J M me,1 m n V s t l _g>i m E!i. l

n

r j"

~,3;>[r l

i

>[

3: w . ga;x;;mg_j y~.mw.g&gfg4ne. .r3Q4 .r. T g3 I m n

%g

n[y,

~ ? .,f s ~Q . L u4(1 g x xmv.kg,gdm.uqyes'Ny2y. yuy,y; m y 1a:.,gc . eeJq c ..g.m"e,3 g:g,yw.f; m . a c nmgz_. ~:.. s'.

/-

g. ,c y gfwpg p>+. A.v. w g m -. 3 gmt I y.. ,o .pm.- aeng.yp gi, 1 -. e. t', m : 4 .g-wpm +s a p:4 .. v T . y. ..* a - g4.== C g~ .t. e r,y~.;g.j% @2~t..i)1.o f,.,g-i v g, = uc ..n w A h~c-e,n.d ,g~.

s eN., a#.

,ap.m P r .% s p "W. n~. M ? - x: g e

a.,,, f.

u g m.- s I

e 4

+ ~ R ~ 4 E . g g. ,k',, r. .. m. , A fo, 3 T 1 s F s g*. 7g. E A n:.. (y z.. a R a t aQ j $y - G 1 8 ~ U 7 f 7 8 4~t 1e0<; .. %.& f. ' ; t. t. sfy1. 6, el, I K

n-a,

- ;F . ;4 N ;, ,2< a'.[ ; +... 'y- '7 5 s ~ r .p 3. ty, e ..v 1' , 1 .1 .pw. .-@.r uy 0 G t 1n,., .,[ ,. Dq. ,7, s 4 3 N e z = n.4,. 4 ~ - v. L- - ( / ) o. A r- );; s.,- A ~ ~ '}- I ..$m.R e,~ .,~ e,. _. 3 ..,.-}Dv~<,,..' E 1 y.. s, S ,-,s. f,.,- . n..,.., %;~. t6 s 2 o '.. y. 7t .j

.. y

,l ... #. '. 7, a.A.< s.' n .,..4 wc~, . s. e n . ; z % { ?.'. s <'.>.,

• 4 f

,y.. . y,,. m. )' ts/.,. k**..v. 2 . i ,.c f_ g =. - ,; 9 .y ,~. 'y -. 3.. ? e ,is ,lt

l i

,l\\I'l \\ !\\lIl l lt n l

ti f11' r

ry

p3,1' L

g, mi4

e

_n-Q- ^ ypn~w~a:w;+q-4 ey k m.' u,wM 7 M, gmw.,nm m: g &:g g n; c g. y *y.. mj,g' 4 pa g gm%.d 2 Q 4 "p, - 7 , xmy wL'pe; yw .e ~c g c4 "J [.- ~s C @ gw ?.,gr.'*g 2. = ,f% c ~ A 4 g c '* *. 2, g - 7fg;_s.A m. A%gg;. hyL et,; m 3l J v&;,Ea% 5%.+~> Y hs-M g j_ g i*

r.

a.y.sy' y,n .T d y. ..f' mpy ~:; r b;gww m y ~' a,w ; n r&s.' s. -;e p u E* T f ._ A~. C A y. ~ P .g M 5 I R 4 E 1 T h .4 , ':~, . 8 - F N. s E A f 8 R ..,t. ;?, 8 . 4 ' U 7 .g -

%. x.

g G 1 t ~ sxi _. Q: w K ,,L t-I qy. v. . # y. 3h v+ ,~ F ...f i 3 m w ,p 0

y. M

'~. ,4,.E w M,. P4,";: i... y, yv ~ _ ~ '[ y,. s;A~w%~, - . [ .f m %el - 1, .~ 7 N 4; v ~ e,' - ? 4.h'[ u. r y. L A y n 4,.- . j/, j \\ . M:: m < =.' h[* I y.. y. ..g ..r . f~,-(,. 9.,,ena m.'m - R s j yY 7 E +c .e S ..w . m n _ u &g(n, " c w.

f o

~.. ~. s-n <r. s- .4 ~ r .~ l .jg: ; }! ,;,i 3: 1 N

I r q n w m 9..~F F,T ","u M p ". 9 k. m@ i d., s'h h c g g 4 p n a 4 s g W g h p! i x; gips /egest/g$h a M p g, a,sy g,p o n m yy i

• i og

,3 a4 .,t, y a ' Mr, gj'q,ch. y., m,g

• w,+s.
• ,~

N './y ww#%% .J C . p t-w-

• f a rp

l, 'l aGo. g 63 %

. (k./,}R ',' A, Q: '1 n 1 ;i{dy 9.ggx n:..m; mA} ~> ~#W , -f, m a-Q 7 gyk,) n j s sn. 4.,. y D , sg, f'y: e . Ff

w. ' q '

j ,,8. 3 =<4 y, ' ' l-ggg ge z 1: y.- dp gwg /,,, N 3 n ^ n. wy aw c /,

g.,..:rqf,

. m' kh p;w J +, w. . ag,' g f C l /*

f/ pl('

' ~ NS -? m. y'g wl,f y %,r [.j@gs,d?j. Y ' " j},4 4, ~; .;) (-Qg [ j/ ep 1 . v' / < . ' gy,[m;$ Q[Nklj Aa R ., f; p'[E '3-s /':.-a g s c %Q v + M,'y !f,fjj; 1D

m. -@ i..

a. ? f ",, ; ;Q w,- y. y LD n. I y AM% g &p. f fb y 'cg%f % gt\\ wht hh f..gg w [^ f$ N AN +- ss

y n e

s r [ y m, w yt.n y D' ny ] y1 y e wnw h j m; f, a p_ +3 / f j;) y p ;e,,,m.p;: y. mn;x. }sm' u< f*v _ i.a, Q,y[;;r ^ }' , a: x a 7, %;_ ', + e; 'i[3 m a,q w,y %*n u. a .., ; G Q Q Q y ~ ' ' " ^ u j f e t4 w[i +;( }. .; o s-e .+ ((3',.s/ w w,v{t F,:W-l.y'k M w .. e c s o

y., w 1,

.?

n

.t + f;":G .?f; TL a / Q ,A A.y1 .v,- = e I , a. _ e, y5 e d c.'. (i b[N 1L i pa

1. f '

J gA m g e d. g v' pv a , s f.- pjpe*3 + vuq W

• v;- t ;g %.., p;g c

Wr. 'f;!p- ,jv 4 4 -A . g s .,'s. %,.,#pg;d,%,*, f.W. n.k 4 {f

• 3 a ), L:>

. s sj \\j:t?f, w}Y,fy g}., 4 7 g cp 4' ]<d.* yo l d,; ^ Qy'Y f d. 1', v A n.,,sj' u..v, n.. j.

y.,

~s. ~,.t v~n m s m f.,y .p-g i - c = -{3 4 6f g Q o, . p.; s a o 4 i, g, 8 f 7 _e i.4 a i i f

.L i' L ,.I'

L?

ya..- -( y '..= _~.- ~ g.. - i ^ .~ y ._M*' .,,e* I . u,&:4xy.. - - i* P f'^'; ~.; 4a.%".,,' t 2 O 7-o~.'. R

. ' _a.

=. D .x .,. ' _ f - l [ T 0 ~ 0

4. 4 k p. ' ' ' Tht F

- [+qf s% 7 _3.. T. L 0 r -. 3 g'. x x. 6 g hn:.

q. '

., '\\g. t ). 1 R l, q"w. . L, E 4. . g :f>uf-E I T g R F f %.'s %4j c;. U A G 7,T'

• .t s

i g'.. I 4 x% o.. F 7 p;> 4. 1 %,s 0 s, r g K I ;'.. - ~: .. a-% . 'r O g. 3.J .' '@.SO.^4,+.m. n.}K' .,.N ' p

• i m,

N T 'V @p /. ,f , j, *.M q.&}}y'-' ..3 a: - t f R g t;g Q e ,.L.b'.._~: Vn%i_$ w #~2.',3.1wf.V'&i s?~ gN'. :7:# -.. ~ ' ,m E y q .n d. 1~ f fs fc %'q g+,s.,gll}'Rw7 _G "[;5 .%,,. n N y C i, ,%% p y$oA&_Y,,Y t 7 .r,. C s4 jQe i 4 . t' <r. :. .l i I W a. [' .':x.- se,. a A + s .y o,.. ,T g y. Qnmym+s*p a g' (s c. g,J.. * ~ ~. T 1.: *.. ' ygr N , ;p +.% y.

).p O

F 4 C .a:

M y.

,6 9 g,hp'. wWr&;T-s. ,r %N / J 5 ,k u, 4 1

- - - - ~ - - - - L' rAa. & m_Mneret' 4 c L,'_, hI 3 rwemye w,, w,m s u. 4,> l l , nV 2 ,t -g = ' %,3., p i-w bam p$u? % <g }h 5, % a* f a v ' . QA...-u.fg, c., d, I i

o

1. 77IM '$

g ' ,wt of.pe . l

MN i'

gf$h$$D Id[fM 7'y MjbD;.,-W M N k. 7I.w~!E h

QNEdid!i _,. w w!$p ;w. T a? w.. u + -...g.4 \\ y,gy.g ggy 4 g5w hpxp[k;[, q 5 hr f{gm c. m -. t m mu.c. _,. n f [s"'t I I g q!)J4 ; q ?n. 4 N F. &N . ;l v I. + s ,h ,l W - .Q( ! ' eq ' I g a "!v,W, f-x

• [*M T

ym;g @b' Qam u -41 IAM k) b,- Q,;_;,;

1. g,qq

} '{ T[' I' ~ ' ' ~ $,bg&(S3gnt#,M))j u q 7 -.. ~ q g ~ $[ $ -[Mjh$ g-1 n_ ~ --, ,,-n ~ a,?E b bMw a ~ _E 3 M ak bhb M sgu%nuaa n.matg gg,,A..o.. s**-a;aw i' ! T'; ! ! C LIN T a l f !,'; E-lM/' /\\ !i f - il f 7 <l " U ! ' l "i G PMCT4PF TEST i

s A I, W. b. a g u*n @ i [ig*y ) L 2p 8 4 L ej f ~ ] wqj;( M !x 1 t p ~ g.) x\\} ~ g y') w s. r cc o Y Q h \\ 2 YY' g & O k. u) W a \\ s[,k! l y 5

qq< f,'

i u C LD ~ \\ W 3 ',b A ) c.;< h g ' k[n,. \\!

fQlrl ;-

O j 4 1\\ +4 A ich s. ce 'I ' ' -V4@ ?- N W M ,? - %[g

• s g

'y. Ny. 5 !g P \\ e I O \\ O g A

g eg% .c .. q;y

• q, p

p e ky,%.. : Qs l 4 ( e \\ s 4 x s 4 c .t .\\. ~ ' e,, y \\,. l et_ l' k e'- ~ e aj y%: Y , a:^r, { \\ Q .e \\ g . Q" t o ',yupf p 4 \\ Y 3,, 3 h \\ g, f \\

c 9

-,s & I'w, p x.

-l#

- + %n,%%. 1 g, A W, .ME,y%} r s u gjeW, % gd [ .- g mgn%.g.- .g A, hO \\*. c,.s. e9 px. w9p; vWgg.g W \\ r %f j .(..

. q f

s y ,dNO bm L,. 0gN p U s, M O. h yb* 9g? s '_, q? f d g% N hjjbl-Sk %gM % a

^* %4 fkugWh.

e , YhI Ne*s. + &y f3 g n1 ( \\( / O' h "f Vl {8 @\\ '\\ s ;,' s -. y s \\ o. h q y o i s ._p 4 t \\ 'N - i t. v 3 S,@$ g e t-w 9 am .. \\ ~D, 'w /co w g, %}'A,~ ~ i d 3

m. %

cri. k %Q

VR

• ~y A^ +'c%4yn 4/

sQ y L- + gaQ w Rg;;: ~m \\ a, y;p r s

w3.

1. # $q v.

rv 1...' d. [ s M$ Yp ' 4 . g,:$Y up fh' ty;:s"~%w V,(2.~gQs n \\ w eWM M gg. y 3 g ~. yp gx e gy N ,[, ' \\ w*** %~ Q. %,h g,; ;f g a %K ^ 9 k l W p p g p, = f g h- ,'dhxu M*yg;;g a 7 JN p.: h m f gyQm g&W' lng 4g r n;m x Vp = y y g;bg% y p t n. ' FWg g \\ x (T s s g%A_ 'f > og q, i % %.3 .e A 'y -, [' yc %, y%y. w. \\ gg$ 4 w'e, p;,,"* \\ e 1 l I l l

GASOLINE FUEL SOURCE ~ ~ WATER IMMERSION ADJUSTABLE TEST TANK + SHUT OFF VALVE 300 FOR BU-7 CONTAINER MIN L a' GAL. g h T I WATER SUPPLY (GRAVITY FLOW) l TEST VIT L THERMOCOUPLE I CONTAINER g) READOUT INSTRUMENT B U-7 SUPPORT \\ \\ ) g L, Qg, / \\ WATER TANK SUPPLY ]/ N d 1seRn0COUete -1NeRn0COUeLE wire / 1-mAv valve STEEL BURN TANK (UNDER WATER LEVEL) 8FT. X 8FT. 1 FT. DEEP FIGURE 20 THERMAL TEST SETUP l 's,

m

ng,n~. y m w m

~.. 1 3 o p., ,[y,,, f h k M.h' v -{ h <[ j h

% q x $ w,,

i y"i 5$ ;! lu. w..vy>, f i If f b;t I h. l -$j;,S i'_;,.!flf%plf,tn,es.; g s ,st.. 2' g,&ld ' &,9. ^

3 1.

a: .,6, y.: [y Lf t h 'l > i P i :'i !n js<<t d,,; l .J {,ig,h ',, ' */ Tf'/ . j, ',',. y@i g!b. fy + },,y ) J hf 'ky f,

,; '.4 l.

-{'fyg% j i,M - p g' 3 j. ,'ii q L e; a ot pQ. y,.d:, W,p> c.., - t ~: o n .g, q). p n: k (l,,[ hs) k M. 0 a.. 4 9 p. C.,. m s ', y 6: 4 p. i

1. f! 3.aqu,n, t g; g.. g',

n. f.,s , .. h GQQ ni Of5f%g ffff.N,9i k; &j'h;r.,lV r, w \\ K

b; 4 A

&q M: . 7, J<,. ,A 2: ~aA. s* muy<... hg4 'p ,,4 i4l.. n o ' r. u_ ,{y. p Ii,r

~f

.g]. h,1) - h Y

;.g.j.Q p,'

lll t . 'kU !e ln y 'b .v..- \\, L -.a h: g c: ih,' d j;' t t =~ . s a. 3' I.' ^l.S,','," 1 J ' ..., : as N' N v _M."4.$# 75 dd ' 't,

M.p Ic,,,

pM ssh [p 'h o M N k;p p y, 1 e [ 4 W.d4 h O L )@3,w;. f:,,;. /,.. r .Q _e:. %m, 7 if,;, 1 u?, w p,, >..i .g .r '~,t4s h [; c,, 1 s . g. n, , ~- e. g.,,

• • I).

r 7 S'^5 j f fs '.' , l,.3?1.,p(e(-)e, 4 i ,- i s, ,3 j 7 kl jg.fq' h., j ' .y,Q 2 f f t{%, l, j ig, cm i s _I.c; Q

• p, f,

h t' w ya e n c. 1.3.o. g 4 g,. s m ,, g.3. m p wue i n pn f f ' uI n .,,f s WD&nt M. w,b:w,. 4 me a, I r

sm.e s s-. m a e-a ..em ---a ~a-- w a -m-w-----+~aa -e a .ma.-a d

'43pf

'r7f I l ? f k, s' 4,a t ,e g g .a \\ ) .s I['f, ([{h.kiy y I 9. , a : ffadh j it p/b

i. It S - m LLJ r..

v.;- p ,s.f -() }. 1..

i. O

<L , m 4* ,6 ( 'A x \\ a i s j .[ 4 jr, g;' x q:= x i p => ' Q )l ' I Vt -ps 1 4 s...

n.

.

,p - \\.

r

_,,_,-sa - ' ~ ' a4=

• ~

[o t i P ;- a go a Tf 4\\ t 1 \\ J 7 I p2 = i l L w i o i ? i

0 h p l i t,,g(1,y n' hf,

w. <

.3 I;s' .h 3 f C r 1, ,J: m "S,m

• E efya, ias:.t.

n. ;

x,, 1. v ~ - - g,j w - oj.- c s- - o ,,;..e t - u r S 7, gah$i[ ,f, am,,,, P!Mi$ 3 ly,Jh,a[ n' D $di A 3 [c$hfMk vn. 3$ y AJ 4 r wue g%en,f: 11 a, q %3 e m aga#y y wgps pay (. o h m'f;gr#dR (f c%g$D "e e t,,, j3 [," ~q J

3;l5 vA

'!!)g,k?,',jQ y s%qu?]w;]( J j p% 4' (p j p; . y;h ep q.s dh h ] g[ 34,f. j@g[,,w%f 4 mg, hy i;fik g, e@. gghg.3-p. 7 _

m y g% g,A h g

y g ? e - p( ,x W &? MW#f r 1w }*Ingu[ ~~ jX Y qgf** [ j! lgf .f0w; ly by ma y: t ~ jt3 F, }I}G !<pi f y 1 n ,O M m I C d-I. 4"%M M. x ;m+q%,dr ' w s s m: \\ y - ,%p & .y n i; m 1: "-~ t 4 g /, ih5 sd $1 n n& n n. %; %+ 9 s ~ 7 -m-se n 7 f 1$$@h#% 7,, M M W $ e$ f}o} a 5t em:he:r :v %}w 7.; m m-qw 6,py,d W f!h %) f i h A m op w ua k m m y nv%n> $,] A s b[ e g e ; i,u p p n e i 4 dm p.gs:dasL Wy nq 4 j:.e y e te 4 h.. a[b b, Y, ~, u

q, g. cs i... e }' yudh,w g. ? %4. . l l-. l - --. it. .e C&, $'~' N s ,g g., n .-.%...---$tifesi%,,

• ' 'w~_.

'l_.!9mm %.. z Y

,p* :t

st* ^* ._ yy;%@ fi':.QQ;::&y p.~%A?x-g p c... - ~ .a:.. _*;. .~ z.p.n.. =- I, ggg pf; W'~ ' z g.h.,p e *p a' ' @y.' + .*e-y y*3 r. A W l l ..p: : r_ w...m + 4. YUi$ 5h

• ~ g *,,

J . ~,e, ;-

• y.54; *.W$, W..

' r!

y. nw n.p.s..n.

l ~- a.s.~. ... y o y,... 7 ~;.. ::. g,. v ~1- "p.g+.%gg.ggs.:yd,g;.gj-p;g;g ypy ch,,. 4;gw 4:~ j (k.,y %g M

, x :.,,,,m%g..,

. ;. s,; < w H x, m. s n, w, fb, [ h. am. FIGUPE 25 THERPAL TEST

+ i t g,yR,.51"i' 2 k ,m,, a. p.k::. gngig.,n**,Sr:;; M-s i -- m n:=s % wne'nt s. - r.. .., ? q jf a - n.a e _.... .g 1 ...n:.. / .. s.re_ s %,g,he : i f 3 4f: e.- ? 's i s ,M! %~.e6*~ i _w. c. w.. 4 Sk u.S??E%.,a,D. %,,4e -[n.:r.NE d~ : ? ~h N DNfiW'C E EdSU i e,., y: y W . w..

,

i_.. ~,.s f. y f,"_,* ;, :",>,- c.

~ w ~... ., ~ - w ;_.,q...-j.m.

y4.

-4P ,4 A - :s.e d ..s F1GURE 26 l ii f prAL TEST

' ~ " " - - " ' - - - - ' - - - - - - - - - _ _,,,. _ _, _ w+e A. Z ff? ') afm a h'h$$ $k J}[$!i D ~k GMBiNM'- O J I' 'A b .y -_ -. ,m g y.... ... %g. _.-._ m j g,, j w ---e ._s.m _.e_7. _. ~ ~.. ' ' a) l ~ an_ m' L. D7ph M!N5fbk. dA 46 h7 %_ -., w _._i ,.. :3=%4g g% y&%g@Qgqs%)%;% %e, m4; ^ "W -[;ypi a ~~ f%_Qh W %d/k W h-y pg a?b A ~mmg,,,g,4,Q _n 4 f l by ' (.n. %qz,y - ~~g ReA

• -~~

i "q-p;jf ~ ,amm... _. Kh h j ycggggin[t hB'dT dn% =.

m f

k -4 sg Q g g YjhI' Mhh u .g. n s - + l 4 p 2 ,,gg F i Y1 h_,k_$. I I I N. g4 *,/alh,,A w-A waEj fhMk$h ft b f t m s ese + p t it. mq$$ m*.n-pu $ h. a, ~[ -~'. kkf a an a ,*lm y?. IffiNfp hN f_ b m % & m$ (t h -i M y... 1 -. "- m ayg dw sel[sd %p~wm n w$GkbbNb4Wastd If hk j wwwpw=m l ww ,,w m*s w g *M"gy*%

m. g " eN, '~ g - y,;.'. w- %

y~~c wn e,. h s,'.,#s,e. M.P s ^*v* h. ?. :.r, g' < *~ ~ ' Q -a s Aw s Qt 'O 'pp* y idpf,' M@#. * < '? ~ n y-h l po.t = 4 g ;;, f*p];. ';d % *t *. Q<,;2;;,.c ~ w s,, ^% ^ m.'",Agntyh _'a y 3 ;. ;' s s L +. '$sc, ng 2;L,x - ~ l P i n - .,y ~ n b-~ ,y sm.d -m -s

e _a a4 .hJ m a_1_ .J ..-a m AmA a m. u 9 O j' .k+ a su l 1 a A. ?' i. 3i f S' i j g" a%:;..

• l ;.

.? ? l i,;

n l

q li% ~ 3p$g. -

t -

1 a f i t l t* f w.,-., 1 w + g ;. 3,.. - ' '^< r.;: su p e g g "N)a,y q; 4 ~r2r. .-v - -..a. C*M M %+= Y % ~ i 4 u r- _,*- 5;%m, ~ a e F1GVRE 28 THERMAL TEST j

2 +, i . 4 L @g ?p H;. r. t a + ~ u 1,. L u } ..g Y. e8 b ij i) 10 4 s * -44 6,W ' ..w i _, r if, m A. :' 'ew

• -[

Q. p ip w c:~ + + ' ..L L.g;u.., t, ~. "W%:'~x;;n;g ~M:i[ [ w. r,, m;. s~.. ~ emqvyQR. p.~.u.;h.aygw ~ -y-E h - t..-Z' N + 'e~ r q, "y 't V3hc. cnh.2 ? l ' ~ ~ se:s F1GURE 29. T H E R M A-L TES T i . -... ~.,. -. ,. -l

4 4 __s __e..-.2 4- ___2m.a.-m- .A 3 ad~._m,,L._ 4 4L_..,m, m 3

4. %wg$eeni m c wL.% +7 l b {

Y'k ^ p%%sw3ggraq# M J('% }n%),y'?v./ g o n ab 2k k f[%fMMVdif!hhhfdk .%L h i[ilf

w. h h.. wh {I Ns h

t :@s,au$wa A: %@ih.a.\\ y(.er ; " &iu:My,a/m,,p p pg f 9%a#edNMfN, e 'a 1. g u r.nn 3 g W>. V_ u q n vt exth& t bk$N&yh[m&s. h l@f, Mkym d % p!". ~ $ g%f'ghhkl7t[k,hC2kbW][ hdd d .fN hd I f.*f. l.'hk"a ! ?r{$,'f i EA 'k V'.- r '#3. e?Q ,]' . (m( % ' fi,l,!ll p r,-( .e s y iq ly ggsa%sQ{'ppn gggumi-edg6' : n 4pgg gg y % k u u,3 a y x

1. ed 9'

% f Ti pynL gSg

1. GW^es,

.i fthn4i C d o, pd> mJJ @$Wf M S

1. V)4ed.$,a9$kd / kd Mih as,ffEf3(@?-[s[

L]e@p- . ape, n. a ~ a DT gk T, J.g @a a ~ gQ~ u_. 1

• Ae. -

g %{ (, 9 m p</;.4 m ~ . g-y. g +,4 t, c. yy t- "jw m}^j.

,,A. 4~ f y a

.i 's ,g i g,n ..s? e g: pg~ylk'{ig jppl U f l.0 g Y.! fj ) w hk:a u Q% p&$$ga (N , gg$ff h p. whrt *\\ 89 y ' L e @p/ gym f'( ' dg$.. Mig; u a c 4e Nj jjd .o%eo:a kgw%m& g(i s;qb # m I g,gwqng&g> gp o g d g, yo y q p f g ) y;g WA mem N., g,.;,, 5

,&M. ,4 Ed m%& M 2a-i,-4.e-s4

=

laE.4,.'. a. .4 .gr s-. i.'. .--ca. .am c- .a 4

s.

._,m.

• " " ' ~

a. h P b 2. i k i -i

3

/ g ' h-h 99, 4 '. ,Y w# 1_ 3. .m. ,s =. ' \\ g pe.,e. ~7 ' - \\ ~~ ;gf.c@% '@'E-a'- M

• .. )

e 9%%gd'f@Yt ~O'. " d . g ;.,:# y 4 . 'G/diffQ~b6 'hY wyes-.l 45 3,l ..w? . $h. 3 4.ee-a > . k << w.%&if ,s. q.:;< .., D. s. .ag ,,e p. Q%[0h. A' g. e g. I - %$$54n M.g@Nd ' {k[ tWr2?? n w.. f) W~h.b'$N %l,y&w. - - y,.,g<upw?,R$h..fl*{,,. h fm- \\ ~ 4' %w'.$m ?~ ' < ~ \\ ~ ~~ n '~ b ',',& 1;.. n.. rO. %,, r * .,j h p j f-\\*%,4 12 A %*KL S, YCL ' ~l" ' e ; 2. \\ e - ~ %gl.%)Qp g,g;9 v., . f. &. *. ? r-m .. j. +f-8 \\ 7% %x :9 ; % &.,.f. h: T ~ ~?. e jf= !l h- ?~' ' 'r 4. r maj

• ~

c ~ ~, ' ~ 1 M. lN

y an,< $ v$$' u m. ~ i~y Ih~. i f 1,( MI cp.'t d. pn -: / y Q. h. j(c h 1. 3 0 3.,S w i,

l. 9 Fah - a

[ t

h.. ),i f

) . y, fj f n L a(.v[~' ' a. e l f f (i - t ',. ;.y g k 4 (, i) g wn, m+,, 9 Q,, y l Q lE=[> l t _ t ) 'c p -1.. q^ _f~. l J{ J,, s.

4. -

~~ ,e %-,:,py m _

w =W~

> ~. M*sqpgy- ~ ;vn.,-ll %. f y g g e n c ~, ~,, % N x. E,[ L- ~ ~ c,~ ~ % :?A $. n % f f. ~ ' ' ^ 'S, 3 f,^ *' TY_,T*;y-n 1 + -t z (,$ v / I .i

'4,4 4

bt'k) .k,- <~ ~ f s (,. { y- ? , _me a5, a. ' 3% j-hqh{d-

4. -

'd s t %g ~ e' p,Q s +p. ,g. o n. cc g, f

i s'

b h ^*T .lbT p 'A. gy ,.ia .,,f~s g f I 7e-y*1. vg. 4; Ao ' $'O ' N,' JM ,e / 3 l e t I _. _ _ _ _ =l + 1 (g s-

,,, ypn m 9

't -'~ ,' e n S. .j i ,2.

t

.. ~ ~. 2 ..__,,u.%,,,,,,ww.;.,_,,,, %s_ m.,,, g _:.u ;a-c.. m f ( Gt!P E 9 r l e j uf 4 ! '".'i L L UIOL fi f @ 'd I SII W III ibYENOII O l

1 POwt R g ~ ,7 y;a

4..sgg n

~ f'y 'Q j ~ h, / 'N O j yo ? y/ Z D ri W. il j R \\ p, m s .r: t a t i j } Of :i ?0L .m l 4 d O

o

([k.pyQg gg@ L gg Co ~a r Lay 4.p U J W: p / p l# o ) 'd r3 X ' m; w O O f 4 4 4-g ;b L .b Q nowtvwttt g j gr O f\\-og ,,jo,, / s hh 1 yd[ h 0 %c. '.:, _ g_g. g j, cAsrtocx --e g e .u m: @[h MDg-- outtoo ( ep, +g, + ' t e y,.7 g % ; ggegg - 7 c +W a:d?'%16 yow lf, tw - p c wg 4 gp l'N3 p% "W f ' pr 3 gg -rq $Y c 77;Q f, j;.. N '?{y.w L '~' i gy,. 'j p. gi M kyNdf h. I h ~r l 4 O(.).hij g , k N. g; W W ~ g t+e;. y c c w v a s 4

f d f.

! }& ~n v?n. i E

y 8,

w; "/p p,. J WO A r' . i i

• i,'

j h.;%lM Q; ? ' %,#. 2,. 0 p ose4 feist w s &gk _ o 3 x

9 k,jfhMkkd 3rr' O. M l

Y ~ 98

.? [Q j 'l, I 7 pp., 13 m g 3

,3 g s-

j,

'vrw,p, ca., 4 %:p .p } k jQ t .h . ltl

N vg,ygl 5 9g' l

r mJgW9 . $49 p.. 77CE*p?tWCWp?pmg.w. );. .Di

y

ym f ps.fjyyjhp+appig,;typ%g{% g g em

^ < ] p; % N g, y g7344 QP , Qhm. fyy.~, _ m.- MuA..., o %gWn @M,WQ2V;&M,Nyx!m%;W1

wp M a

'W we ,.;&.,M, 4J.e,,4;ppigs& ',,,,rwst uM.<W~ G, a%; j u w e g c MA p @g g;J &g y. n a J ay agh i ,y a um g g A $n&Lbsiuaiffw u $$$5n5Wuihk b & k$%fi h kkh}$& $$A N w SmeA* R %s54 ,a I .t + >~ "- - - FIG. 33 HONEYWELL DIAL 0 TROLL SHOWING TEMP READINGS DURING THfPMAl TF

~ h.re%~Tds k ) cri r. 9 ui-e 15.. '*j' I i;. gQj,py,pWtt" g ' '..g. y

• O[.

s. J g?p\\ ', ( ik \\ 'j o, '.;;ssa r,Q ' n\\ N f'3;\\ ,Q Q. ,p;, ;* k ;. J 5: p l % ) ' <m g;6 t' %,w_ f '~;m m' N L - Y. ..Q .i 9, {,,l ^ s. ~ \\ j S~g s \\. . ' Y{) Y 1s L. y ry.y. Vir $f yppp.%.,:):.;nl.,./ / s,k 7e, y #!i$ y..g:,;. p.. t fif ui-a m, a y, ,a4 e+ s 2 i;gfg,; 9 f z q: a; 2 ~~ F; y g q s f)j, Qb 4 y y y \\ 1 '>y +.* 4.J

,ls

\\s - v.- 'd 't k' ^ \\

• ~

"] L3 2-17 Ym _T,/{[V 4 _k N N is e k

t JC 9

w a %; Q s

g, t 2

,o p (' (O M4 y A T E P-5yyE?b] -)N l'c 3 r (

a t i,, d W< .a A -.t.2-_ 44 -4_,W. 4 .ma._- J.a.m_ &me+ad-

• <k;h--
• ~#-

at.e,,+w. e r p a _eh A r >AuA.h-m Aea 4 --seaw_m ~. ~ j "g t i i, i l + iW' l l i is ~ 1 sst g g e i t 11 I l I s i s ,e n: ~ $ff i a s.. r t g4']lblj,fgJ, ~ i+?ma; ., kh S oc" Qj% g- ~ j.y :{ s g.. FIGURE 35 POST TEST I N S P E C T-1 0 N

a .A _m.g.. A---2 4.- 5 4 1.-

• =-

+Jm-- 5 Ah J anw.-4 e m.-a.--a-m -_r I i m.a' s Sg

• 'f z

<+..et ,a~ f Z

• [:

O l \\ ~ s v L.o O l i M Z ' s. b M O ./ ~ ? w 1 g [ [ m o O' _f fi gg ~ m 3 s = yw3 a ?. xg\\.9 <m N)'l ' (%,,'" .R '3 a -. * - s .c s O "3 $s$hseat v 1 . s. ~ -se 1 = y ,w-- w -w-r- e +r w-mi

---

7w-

./ y$ ,)" / w' / 7 a a-' ,J s + f, j15'b g .? n fr ~n.

n..

y:, O / { / \\ y f x e / p V e O N r / \\ O s O' N o x $s s j' [ N s y 5 O 3 S g / s W d# x A N 4 x /j 8 o w ---,, +--, m

i m r p&lg { 4;}y G-y ' f7 4 %gmwre Q m. .s r*f.W) 'fy6%yfn$+ ( &&t gQp% V n QC9 $$L 'Wd w .. n: f,ww*f ' Y, I + .. ~; jWo 'E, , as up. .x wng. l0 ~ tWNA 4 (agA m e e .hgg%***Kh e; ~. y u

b. ?

lgl f c,f, lms~..

nQ m en.

p-upy;[1r s y 4% V; AW. % @wdN +

&l5 A W e g p,r

.Pd[Af ky% n "A t.W'M n.., '.. ) c 1 gg. g .3. Jt, c %',a; w fg. -;- go,, 3 4 +x m.; r y r% e '. ,g w.r x:e 4e s W%g y.

9. w.pa9n iy w c.

4p y -e'3.,*.,,,y -) g gg m 2-e- w, :.f,YY), l ,i Y,l Y.,g ).? c ww n &,.c... - +~ $w Mp m((. ,,i;," w;, m s,.. Yh

$hE #~,,,,.n -

? Y :,. p \\ '1, ? W m, A Q tif ~ + y y . w,f).. - m-l 'iW.;4[ ~ 4 g (. y .. Q i hh j&upg > g.bg g w u %$$@y% a &Q p

jv A

Y M.. QMg f-y%gg .~ c gan#y $ppea,'ph, A LM"q ffe

M.

$$p lJ5 \\ i .($;,a,&p. r., 3..

q

-} 4 ap.q

i..

s,' s m-' 9Qa).y,yp q[* ppg .s., uy q. 3.\\s p/4 s T g, -y

r% %'

t s m /(g4jr g g l $ap&.hg&lhiW N2 ' , ? ~ N &$? gut),,ah h si x_ hk Mf ,t

• ^

~ %ji @u mLl

5RyhchA..

~'%g5 g w k{3dj$m.$, W ,,hhk'$ ng$x$ n x sM 1RRew Nfh;;$hhi$$j$ye 'A ' n 0g f41% g Mh E l h% hNksdj$ EQErz.- W T2 ikS k92@%- ,'9$W y/M.lM@Gji "A - M'! ' r hY 4 1 c.., .v-w. ~- .. m.., FIGURE 38 POST TEST INSPECTION i

i l %.s w.g. ...ny. ...ce m, ;,v.... y .,...,.'IE.','a- ~ ~ ... r s e. 1 ~ : .v .y .,,.3 .,., ; rw. .m.. :n.u.p., ;f :- n v.. :.; o .sy f. ~ ,s,,

g..: m.

s ..u a.:, s e', y. ;;;. g.

a..

• d 4

n ._ ~:.. m; o gm.m n.. - ), .:n,,. ; ..gy,, y,. _q' A ', e@ " c.. ,s. - <,, '( e,,] , y's ;s

4-4

+ v i..' r. 4 i .7 3 [.'j A,'~.: : ' >... a. f +. ^. glM.a%, 3.. l,i. G Q,re n r:;

• ,R
• f, p.;,<.., <

c. :?;

w ..,s.,v ogw... ., p ?h >S. a . a,..y, L %s.g,s; in ;. .. - ~. w>..,, %:,. 1 o . :y, .8.y

x, v...

c, n y,4 ;..... A... .$q g,~.

m n.

',e - f. ". yp. w . f' W. w.Q 't< R... .:, v.. lMW,)' - 9 '3 ' : : ',q. , ;,a,6 ;.J,;.. : )d, e y w

< ;,*:f L -

e

.v.u.p,m_.. ,c e p . m.. g h q. c ;.. m. p: '. ;,*,g.~, W.. m 5..pq. y. <,s , / , ; y yg. vg.a:..pgp 6. g,. ; m...A:.m ..pp as v

s... e

g.,

z. -

.. y ..y.,. cg . p,..e a:i.p g cl , r.,. -, 1 ,;q.,: .,., n y. (. \\ <.:, so ..c..,,,m..,,- . \\. > 4 ~,. a . ~" \\ 1 FIEURE 39 C fi A R R E D I N S l' L A T I O N DISC 0 1 a m

_~ l a., 4 'S - u t,.. r i.- i i 1.) 3 l, ' '. am 9 ,N i9: .a.. ,0 1 . ; ' T :; r c e m

• f'

[ I4,'. I q 1 p >. [- gi a s o< j 4 % ~~ ; 3 l $o ^ to C f Htte h W,' !C Iib [N $51 aa j[ 8,5 4 (_: t y e sn !\\ .. a = e

• \\ u p. y

""a -} v ^ ~ ~. .~7' g j bb$e i 4 mmE= v'- 1 s. m u _. j, -- h$ f ,t i O AH+ r QJ ., h. f d]l,2:{,) "' H $ .- q j?: ;/a p t.u INrgili}';![.( 83, a w on t.[b. (~'f , a)f nf;Of t' at f +O{g;i [ { m xxe I k; O ' ~ ~ ' o

e,

r g w

-.~_. h I

f',,

G4 l ll

y. k f

I .N b ,.E g9 g r wqs WMb;:: _ 4, t pj ' p$$$ M4 tl l y

I.

D

PAGE - 1 of 3 O-() APPENDIX 1 COMPLIANCE The test referenced in Paragraph 5 have been conducted and satisfactorily meet the acceptance criteria of the test plan. Container Drawing No. 128n5231 Container Serial No. Kl878 Date Tested 3/20/80, 3/21/80, 4/1/80 and 4/2/80 0 [ 7-2-70 Packaging Engineer v s //-/FdS uel Quality Control Engineering 1 r e 4'[2/!8-Licensing & Compliance Audits b./ 4 Traffic & Material Distribution prt W 7 / fd b

PAGE 2 of 3 j './ APPENDIX 1 COMPLIANCE i The test referenced in Paragraph 5 have been conducted and satisfactorily meet the acceptance criteria of the test plan. Container Drawing No. 128D5231 Container Serial No. K 0174 Date Tested 3/20/80 and 3/21/80 0 / Fuel Quality Control Engineering MAf_/ M-8/"IO f y 1/ g Licensing & Compliance Audits i / f/ d Traffic & Material Distribution f / O

PAPE 3 of 3 ( APPENDIX 1 COMPLIANCE The test referenced in Paragraph 5 have been conducted and satisfactorily meet the acceptance criteria of the test plan. Container Drawing No. 128D5231 Container Serial No. K 0319 Date Tested April 1, 1980 %2.40 Packaging Engineer a e_h //-/4 -70 / Fuel Quality Control Engineering

• V

/ 8 1.icensing & Compliance Audits / L'27?M //f4 Traffic & Material Distribution ~ / l

PAGE 1 of 3 APPENDIX 2 i TEST CHECK SHEETS. i Container Drawing No. / N 8 8F23/ l Container Serial No. K /7 78 Date e Pre Test Visual Inspection [/. J/ro/m per Paragraph 5.1 Q R89 oor-Loading fvt Y' ggg6fooG' h 4b10lPo Water Spray Test I ~ Drop Test Y Penetration Test Compression Test 30 Feet Free Drop i Af te 9fulfb ,////. IdI[4 Puncture Test Thennal Test M U Water Immersion Test /A h8 { i k Fuel Quality Control Engineering ') i ) h ,o

-{ PAGE.2 of-'3 i APPENDIX 2 i TEST CHECK SHEETS i Container Drawing No /fE D,f2 3/ Container Serial No. KO/ 79 1 5 Date Pre Test Visual Inspection -i per Paragraph 5.1 M G[to/so tt,R8P 00f f G to/ro Loading ppdpectr Water Spray Test l Drop Test Penetration Test o -3 Cornpression Test 30 Feet Free Drop i /4/[o,7/u/9 1 A/D. 7,/gf Puncture Test Thermal Test Water Innersion Test m Fuel Quality Control Engineering g [ / o

I i

.l ~l i

PAGE 3 of-- 3 ' ~ v . APPENDIX 2 r TEST CHECK SHEETS Container Drawing No. /M38J 2 J/ Container Serial No. N03'l9 t Date f Pre Test Visual Inspection #6Msh A % kh/So per Paragraph 5.1 ( Ac5 3 18/fo Loading' Ah Water Spray Test Mtb f[/[fD h Drop Test [ [lk# [tWf-// Penetration Test [th [Mfo Compression Test l/I " - ~ 30 feet Free Drop s' ~ Puncture Test Thermal Test i Water Immersion Test Fuel Quality Control Engineering [ IO { / 1 u O i i o

g t ', i:~ h e o (( h L /w B O D N o' E T H D H la G E a' N G Y { l T E I B l J E A L E N W D B W M ft7 R L-E O D g T N i U W-O k D R O C O C-E N O j D L R O O R I R A l O O g C 6 T ; I 0 GE R C; e R E es c B, O V o E; T s st I G L

M a

c 'O '5 E; A D N i a N I ii E D 3 L s P A A:; 2 b AL P O S R R : W 7 E: S G 0 C 6 r -U N: N 8 / / i B e E D 6 N I g G: D L 7 A ? a A s n A s O s i J L T H E G n l a E v W 0 O b n I n 9 2 's ss L 6 7 s ona N 7 i 7 1 ) d i 1 a 6 S 8 > / o s o s o R '" e o c O T psp i O N E E d N E N^ P T M N'u 6 6 8 P 8 Y C H T R 2 R I R 5 E C p # n L C ? J I O R p 3 R N 6 no T a l F M s / P E g

f?. \\ li ~ Request No. gg -q q

2 5

NSR Area No. PROCESS AND EQUIPMENT / FACILITIES CHANGE REQUEST Requestor _ Initiating Component,,0 O Installation Responsibility Equipment Location C UMO POWDER PACK AREA AND TEST PAD hTST OF HCX. Purpose of Change TEST LOADED nu-7 AND su-5 coifiAINERS FOR RELICENSE BY C NRC. NATURAIwOE Description of Change STANDARD PACK b b-tGALLUN FAILS WITH 4b EU6 UU 'v 9 ECA] LOAD AND SEAL IN 2 BU-7 AND 1 Bl-5 COMAINERS. TEST CONTAINETS TO NRC TEST STANDARDS ATTACHED (3FTOOT DRDP, 40-INCH, FIRl D TC.) Scheduled Project Completion Preliminary NSE Review dB .glu/8 Final NSE Review Needed By 3/18/83 Requestor's Signature /Date /1#8 r g:j Nuclear Safety Engineering 3 f/f 6 1. Type Analysis Required: *Cri ticali ty O

• R diological O

None 2. New/ Updated NSE Method Sheet Required: Crit. J Radio. N O None 5 pe Required . _, /f i f Anticipated Availability of NSE f)ieth Ppcio ogical Safet //.UE P4-.- 3. )) Critica ity Safet 1 Signatures:b r.k b

1. w,J 0 r-

./opIdf l/r - - uA 4. 5. Remarks: t A V Fuel Quality Co rol Engineering Np 1. Is New/ Changed Quality Instruction Required? Yes No If Yes, Anticipated Availability of Instruction 's,' 2. Responsible Fuel Quality Control Engineer 3. Approval: Mgr., Fuel Quality Control Engineering Fuei Process Technology /// 9-1. Is New/ Changed Instruction Required? Yes No If Yes, Anticipated Availability of Inst /uction 2. Responsible FPT Engineer 3. Approval: Responsible FPT Unit Manager SHOP hv rs 4 y 'U Subsection Manager Approval '. ~' Area Manager s 1. Priority Assignment.For Nuclear Safety Review 2. Area Manager Approval Nuclear Safety Engineering b n:3 'N Date Approved Request Receihd Date Completed Area Manager Acceptance of Completed Project Date

• Documented information from requestor required per P/P 40-5 Appx. A APPEN9TX 4 NF-1-014 (llpf)

~ URANIUM POWDER LOADING REQUEST f

APPENDIX.3 Page 1 k'APLM G EN ER AL 7p ELECTRIC Oc RELATIONS AND LTTILITIES OPERATION San Jose, California Februan 10, 1978 P TEST REPORT BU-5 AND BU-7 CONTAINER PRESSURE TEST A. OBJECTIVE The objective of this test was to verify the integrity of the BU-5 and BU-7 containers for the New Japanese Container Regulations. p{ (j The procedures were presented to the Japanese and approved by them. B. SUf41ARY The following tests were performed on one BU-5 and one BU-7 con-1 tainer on Febmay 6,1978 thru February 10, 1978. 1. Both containers were tested under water to 1.50 Kg per G1 for eight hours. This was done by submerging them in the test tank in Building G, to a depth of 50 feet above the containers. 2. The containers were then pressurized internally and checked for leakage at four increments: a.) .75 Kg/Or for t ree hours b.) 1.0 Kg/01 f r three hours 2 2 c.) 1.25 Kg/01 for three hours d.) 1.5 Kg/G1 for three hours

G EN E R AL [$ ELECTRIC TEST FIPORT 2-10-78 Page 2 C. TEST EOUIPhBTT The following equipment was used in the test: 1. 60 feet deep test tank 2. BU-5 container S/N B-7522 3. BU-7 container S/N K-0397 4. Permagage # 175 0 to 60 psi pressure gage, regulator and valves as shown in Figure 1. D. CALIBRATION g The pressure gage was calibrated prior to testing. Calibration g( record and curve (Figure 2) are included in this report. Calibra-tion was made with equipment traceable to the National Bureau of Standards confomance. E. TEST RESULTS 1. Water Immersion Test There was no water leakage in the inner containers after eight hours of submergence in 50 feet of water. 2. Air Pressurization Tests There was no leakage of air from the inner containers when pressurized as shown in Figure 1 and held at pressure incre-ments of.75, 1.0, 1.25 and 1.50 Kg per square centimeter for periods of three hours for each pressure increment. CONCLUSION The EU-5 and BU-7 containers passed all the pressure test require-ments for the New Japanese Container Regulations. In fact, the tests exceeded their requirements. The water submergence test was for eight hours rather than three, and the BU-7 container was tested at r LN i ~

1 GENER AL $ ELECTRIC \\ E TEST REPORT 2-10-78 Page 3 2 1.25 gm/cm for 14 hours. There was no leakage in either case. i / 0 17 I Certified By: J. A. 2idak W. S. Cowan, Manager' Packaging Engineer Packaging Engineering M/C 512 M/C 512 JAZ/da 1 m 4

n-n. NY. -

n. \\

PRESSIRE / cs m ~ 90 PSIG X u4 AIR SilPPLY n F 1-SillTT OFF VALVE REGULA'lDR BLEED VALVE BU-7 INNER .,u m, .c= C0tTTAINER s >d { ) ( Illi-7 01flIR 27 -( COWAltER Rtr (' 'J A) g ,s x- ,D INSUIATION )(' N. e fkh>WY FIGilRE 1 TEST SElUP

~ + _.. - - r e .I. _.. l. l. ..I. .....,.l........_..,,.... .l-... .I.. 1. p.... . ~.. _. .l.__._ .I..,._._.. I. 6. 't.. ! :1;

l.

g t' j * - ';. l f ^ I " M [ * ;-, ' ' 'l* I;...._... o....... l.. .l. ...........,.... 1......_ _..... _..._._..g. 4.....g. ...i...._ .t. (,. ..._.,._..._..._1 . ~...... ............-,......_._.f...~... ._1_.,_. o,.... .t......_.. .._.1 t..... .._-t...... ,.1 .....~........l....... !...t.__1._.......__... l... ._........,._i._.... .,_..J._. .t._...,.._...... _..;.......1... ..t_....._.._._......_....o.__..t.._._._......., .......4 ..__..l_..._..., ...~.~.f.~. ..t._..- .t_..... i __gt._..._.~1_,.__._.._._.;..!._..__,....._. ..t._._._=._...._...,....l,._.,.__t.._....,.,,........!......,. p .... _. ~.. _. _ ..._a._. .4.__..__4_.._._. _. ~ . _...._. _. _.4 7.... ..!_._...._......I..__.t._ ..J.._._..i._._...b.._....._.._.. ......_......._..____..~._...._._.!_._.,.. ,. _.. _..........l. 1............ ......t._ ._...l__._ r... _.._.._.! t .t.. _..1_..... _.......... t ...1_._. i. ..__{...._.{._4_.$_.._u_. 1'.._......._._. ..._.!._.j...,~,,. _.; ,._f.......3. _.1,_...,._.._ l.....L.-....___. 4 _.f..__.... _., . _.4... ....w L. _........_ 4. 1.. 1.. _.. _.... _.._. _ E. _. -d. 1.__ _. ] __. I -.. i _1 - -. ___._4._._...1. _. 1.._... .._1..._............f...4....g.._. ._......l......_.-~.4.._.-. . m _ _ !..... _. _ _ _..._.p...... ...,._'t..._.q_.._...... ._..g. _.-. _ j -. _ ..._..._._..!._..I..._.__..._.___.......i_._.____- .__.!..__.....4..._.~_.~._._..._..*t____.__.__. . __...._.._.1.. _ _. _. ~. _..,. _... ......t_ 4_...._ ._....._4.....!._.... ....~_.I...._............_-.--.i...._-+..'l.-*..'_- ,..,_.__.l.__.. _ _.. _... ~ _ _ _, .....__....t__..6'. i g_ ._..,._._.__..L._..._..__I_._._. ._...4.__....._...._._._.....__.._...__.__...._-._!-_..._._ .._.._._L....,__.t_.._ .. _.....~..- .t__..-. .....__..t._t... ..t... __-......_t._!..)_._.,_._.,._....._...._....._......_,_1....._.. __-1.. .... _.. _... _.~._.j_.,-- . _,.... -. _ _. __--.__.....l.~_-1._., _t _.. ....,_..t.......... _t.._____".1._.._._ .. _._ J _. . _...t.... ...L..... .....t. ._....__.._1.._._...__.l.__._. [.._._._,.. . _... _ _. _...p..._ ...[.. t- -.d_.. - -. _... ' ._. _ ','~. - - ...n.._ -.1.....'._..1...._,'_-.'.'.....~._... _.._.__..._._...._.__.._..__._._.__._..._..l........ 1._ _ _ m _1._.,._ ...._...._...t...... _.-_t_.__..__.) _..f_4___.. ._i ..,_ i ..i.... I __..._{.. b ... I _. ! _.. L.__... . _ _ _. _... _ _. _...t_....,..t.._.. ..._.__1__._.Z..~..~., l . w 4.._ ._!._.........--v.. .. _ t.... _..... .. 3._.. .L.. _f_..___. 1_ .p._._ q -- 9 . _j..... .. _............... [Q3 i .t' .._.._...__1._. ._._.i,............_L._-, _t__.._.__._.. _.. _. .._.~._.1_.__._.. .i. ...... +.. _.._..i___.__,. _...... _.. ............. t.. _.._.t_..._.. __....._. N. /. __.1__... ..._...,.J_.... 1

1...,_i

__._.s... 9... ._._t-_._ .-_._._.1.._...._.4__,...._... _.. _-. ._........~. 1

t....4

.4 _._.l... _.2__._. .r .. w } .. 1. _. l.... ! .. __.._.__J._....__. ..I._..t.... b) .I .._ p._. 4 r . _ _...T ... !..__. t.. ._.f, ..__p..__.._.... m_ .Z____._ ._._e-__{.___,.~..._.. ._f.._.._ .__g[_...._..-, _.._..,.._..__{._.__L___ _ j _.__. ._..g. _.a.._. . _..._. _. _ _. _.. I __. .._.l..-_...,. . _.. _....._......I._._-.fM,,,,, ..I._.._. ._..I__....._..... ._.4.-

_!....,.__..t.......__.._4._

._.._+___.___._% __._t__.._._._.....__._w.__. _. _. _. j. i _..._L_..l_... .._.t_..... t .._._.__t. .._.4.__.._.._. _.;y _,_._..._w__.~1.__!_......._-*.. <1 ...... _....... _..... _..... _._......t..__..._...]._..,,..__.__.6._ _...t... :.._2_.- . t __j _. _! _.___ _,. _ _.a-_.+....__. _. 4. 4 .__4__ ..._._.._.__.t.__.___..__.._.___.. .. _,._4._..._ __.....__.. _.. g ~4...._.... ._. g g_.., .3_._.~ .. _~_. .A,._._......_.........___.I_.._,._...._ .. _..._..l...._.t.._-... _... .,.........!_.t. ._.t,.. __... ._.1__.. _._. 1 _.... ..... _...I_.._.__ ._4 1. .~ _.. t._.__._ 1.. . ( ._1___...._.__ __.._.._._._t.__..._ !_..._._4...._.__. . __.1._ - _.. t ,.t._.. _ _. _. _.. _.___._..-_e._..___. g,n . _. _ _,.__.___4___.,.__... ...m.._J.__........... _. . f _. r j _..... _.. _..._.t.._._..__.._ .....1.__....__.._.__...._. _. _, _. _ 4 4 i. __+ 4 4 _l-'.. _ ....... _ _ _. ~.., __.4... ..6.._...._._.._...,.- y_. ._....._.4..g_. .-.g .e e..-... ..4. ... j e e._..._. ._4._ I .a...4...6..,.. ....- = _4. g ...6. ].. _e .e .l_._,___..._..,..m....-..i_ 4... t _. _._ 6 _ 1_.:.. 3 _ e. . l.._..... 6. ... _.._ t.

1.. _ I. _..._-...

_,.1._._a... .__4 ... g. 3 _.. _+._..._..... _.._...__+,_.y_...l_.._..,._.,_.........._. 't..,,,, 1._..._, ..._.1..._._.._...._.._.8._...,.*_.,-.._..p..... .. {. ,.a......- g .._.._.,y ..a._.. .... _ y...,.._..... ._....+ -

• • be.

} g_.e.,__

==.-). .a3..*.* 3 ..i 9 .........1-.-.6+. ..4.... .6.6......... .g l

• • • O a.

g .-..= l ..j9 ..=...... _-...._.. ....g.._.*4_*._. [ gg g ....e .,.,.,$.e. e.46e.-. +I _*eu-i ,._.=.P*=P'= .I q_ .e. f 4 ..g 4 ..,.,,.., _.......6_._ 4.,..s. g g _..,e.. ..g m. a... ._.e ..m. g g ............4. 4.. .....e 4 .._.. g i. .9..... s i ..d. .*h....... '.. _.. '...* a. l . 1. .. 1 .,..g, ...l _... _.,.. _.u.... . -......,..l .+ ..... _. _........_l__..._..........t.. . I. i ._~. _ _. _.-. _.,.. i . e ... _. _........!._.1.._._._..._.._.............. _. ..... _. _._....l._.._.. ,-\\ i .... _. _..._l..... 1 I i ._.L....!_-..... 6...o..._ ~,...._.. _.._.. _. 4........_._..._...._:, + l t, .l._.._... .t i g . t. s,..... .... _... _............_.t... ,.. _...._.l_..._..,. _.. _..,. ,.l_. +.. _ l 4, ...,,,.._..t........,..-........ i ..t... . ~,__.. ,. f I. .4..- l.._ ._,l ., _.,1 __. 1 1 .t. t.. - 1 j. ......J 1 .t. 1.. i ) O b b t es J

P,. 4.... .. Q....,1.~.h. 4.... y~.....,, ~. s.s... 2.. . -. p; 5_.. ;.p.+.p',....:..:. =..: :i,-;a.,,,,;a. sx..g .& h ...n.,...

..;.s :..

O.: e.v.:: .c.~ h : ,;fG.:1:s v.;p .n. =, ;9 Q;.r.:;;;.;;*L.'; A q-....i...: a:.' 1~: :,-3 M r, -, 1, s3 CON TAIN ERS-lBU S S/N 8-7522 8U 7 S/N KO397 L TEST. DA'TA'. l i DATE Tl M E ^. PRESSURE PERIOD TEST RESULT I, 9_7-7s K *. 3 o A m So (e tvares. 1 4' % pm T H t.1._.8u_f Ann Av7 a 1 O c o i' L ear i ' s I 2 7F f o ro, A m.75 N/c at-t 1 'ce PM .77 3 HRS Bor tJo 12 mms V I

• so pH I.o 50/ n t

? 6 A t IS* DM t.o "% t-2 %r_ Hrs.3 0 5~ No l. e' A?tVrf 1 2 79-P eo AN t. 2.f' #Yc 42 10 00 A h 1 25 N 0 W~5 005 %)dNA7C lo t to AN

l. SQ Obt-l I to Pm l.50 Kpf,2 3 yg3 gog y, f gggm,,

t {T I ' 15' Ph. 7f Oh* 1

• 78' y a' t S" Ph,yr Qfn2 3 yrs-60'1 g o J. c M A S E 1

-c7 - 7 R s+ ' 17 P M i.o 4}n' I t 7 's 9'. is Ph N, o Obn

• 39Rs Rd 7 tuo l 5 AHd l

' 7 T T 2 CPM l.2s'" % ' I.2.5 Wcs l 4 H A3 1.1) 7 & L E A M.n s

• -lo -7 8 9 '. 2cA h

' -Il - 77 9l.1 CAM 1Jo Wcn 1

- n.- 1 r 1.'ec ft1 I.se Ys/mi 3%.ns go 7 N L enxaa e.

e l t I t d'* i ce.~..A.. -. m.- --..= -. sa._... uy ~m 6 I I g. ,4..

BY OATE ] 'C 5.-.,.y.ry./- O{Vi]Anar'!_)...;.,J[c]lii,.'.T'-

1. SERVICDa, e " s i ~7 e In-ittims c^t'Ba^t'o" -

.a..:s. u

' " ~

MAlliTEl'Al'CE RECORD TECHNOLOGY & DEVELOPMENT

3. RE VIE b".E O B Y DATE METROLOGY & CALIBRATION LABORATORtES 4 F AfAILY CODE

5. MF R CODE

6. MODE UDWG NO.

18. R ACK/SYS IC NO.

89.tiGSM k hC.MA6 AGE N6 Nb / PSED 11.

19. OPE R ATION N/A La-use 9/A

10. MOS EML

7. lC NO.

8 STATUS

9. PREVIOUS CYCLE A

b. C,a G.

12. D ATE SE RVICED

13. D ATE DUE 14 CAL HRS 15 M AINT HRS 16 OTHER HRS 17.

20. LOC AT ION b lYR [h bb N

1.O C.O o.O Tmtet 9 FW YR FW

21. M ANUF ACTURE R

22. INST RUME N T N AME 23 SERI AL NO.

Wesa%Touw Posssee gauge 84fsE

24. SPE CIF IC AT SONS

25. PROCEDURE USED I L d M - l '2. - 00 5 T ufo

26. D AT A ISSUE D 7 O OTsE R iceSCRieE'-

O YES O

27. RE PORT NO.

b3 ewe

28. T Y P E OF SE R viC E 29 RECE4VED

30. LAST SE HVICEO

33. LABOR ATORY ENVIRONMENT FW lYR

!YR FW TE MPE R ATURE 'C CAllB R ATION CE RTIFICATION

31. ASSIGNE D R E CA L L IN T E RV AL O PREVENTIVE M AINTENANCE hi RE LATIVE HUMIDITY C OTHE R (E XPLAIN)-

32 SPECIFICATIONS 7

34. OPE R ATION A L7 M

O Our EdES 'W k CAllBR ATION INSTRUMENTATION USED MFR MODEL DR AWING NEXT DUE MFR MODEL DR AWING NEXT DUE IC NO. CODE NUMBER FOR CAL CODE NUMBER FOR CAL 4E CH u-83 24 coo s.3 5 -5 76 J N 4EMAHKS I

CAllBRATION DATA 't.tE N T N A M6 iC NO MFR MODE L OR AW4NG NO. SE RI AL NO. A(4 M ALLTOLt.1I klTNAdA46 176 bh! b6 FUNCTION AND/OR CA LIBR ATION NOMINAL ME# SUR E D VALUES RANGE TESTED TOLERANCES VALUE INITIAL RUN L /) FINATRUN i TE6T o-Ao P5tG Sr m Aco c Au ce o e o 5 Lt. 5 E-10 9.35 lo 's

14. D5~

15 2 19.O f Do 3 D'f.DO DC 30 99.95 So 4 y 4o S9. c. o 4o ( Fo 49.4 o 50 60

59. G0 Go 1

^ ^^

l i F LOl 1 l l APPENDIX C i " CRITICALITY SAFETY ANALYSES: BU-7 SHIPPING-CONTAINER FOR BELOW 5.0% ENICHED UO2 POWDER WITH FAILURE OF CONTAINMENT AND MODERATION CONTROL" AUGUST 31, 1993 .O r i i e i t t LICENSE .SNM-1097-DATE 09/14/93 PAGE DOCKET 71-9019' REVISION O C

O 9 'l Criticality Safety Analysis: BU-7 Shipping Container for-Below 5.0% Enriched UO Powder with Failure of 2 Containment and Moderation Control August 31,1993 O i 1 I i i O i

1 g Table of Contents I. INTRODUCTION................................. 1 II. A N A LYS IS....................................... 3 A. B U-7 Container......................................... 3 B. General Requirements for Fissile Class I Shipping Containers..... 3 C. UO2 Powder and Water Mixtures........................... 5 1 D. UO2 Powder and Water Mixtures with Hydrocarbon Additive..... 6 E. Materials of Construction.................................. 7 F. Analytical Method....................................... 8 G. Modelling of Geometry................................... 9 III. CRITICALITY SAFETY ANALYSIS RESULTS...... 15, A. S ingle Containers........................................ 15 B. Infinite Triangular Array of Undamaged Containers............. 22 C. Triangular Array of Damaged Containers..................... 24 D. Presence of Plastic Bags or Other Moderating Materials Around the UO2 (or UO2 Containers)............................... 27 + 1 IV. SUMM ARY AND CONCLUSION................... - 28 O V. R E FE R EN C ES................................... 29 l l i i O i t w r-- e

---

,-...m.

r .-m-

i List of Tables Table Descrintian Page Table 1. Atom Densities for Maximum Density Mixtmes of UO2 and H2O 6 Table 2. Atom Densities for Maximum Density Mixtures of U(E)O2 and H2O with Carbon (C/U=1.27)................................... 7 l Table 3. Phenolic Resin Atom Densities in the BU-7 Container......... 8 Table 4. Boral Liner Atom Densities.............................. 8 l Table 5 GEhER Geometry Model for Single Containers (GEMER Inputs) 12 } Table 6 GEMER Geometry Model for an Infinite Triangular Array of P' Containers.............................................. 13 4 Table 7 GEMER Geometry Model for a Triangular Array of Damaged Containers.............................................. 14 Table 8A. GEMER Results for Single BU-7 Containers 30.0 kg U(5.00)O2 and H2O.............................................. 15: 1 Table 8B. GEMER Results for Single BU-7 Containers 30.0 kg U(5.00)O2 l and H2O + 5.7 wvo HC................................... 15 i Table 9A. GEMER Results for Single BU-7 Containers 31.0 kg U(4.85)O2 and H2O.............................................. 16 Table 9B. GEMER Results for Single BU-7 Containers 31.0 kg U(4.85)O2 1 and H20 + 5.7 wvo HC................................... 16 Table 10A. GEMER Results for Single B'U-7 Containers 35.0 kg U(4.60)O2 and H20................................................ 17 Table 10B. - GEMER Results for Single BU-7 Containers 35.0 kg U(4.60)O2 and H2O + 5.7 wt/o HC................................... 17 Table ll A. GEMER Results for Single BU-7 Containers 38.0 kg U(4.32)O2 and H2 0................................................ 18 Table llB. GEMER Results for Single BU-7 Containers 38.0 kg U(4.32)O2 and H20 + 5.7 wvo HC................................... 18 Table 12A. GEMER Results for Single BU-7 Containers 40.0 kg U(4.10)O2 and H2 0...................................... '.......... 19 Table 12B. GEMER Results for Single BU-7 Containers 40.0 kg U(4.10)O2 and H20 + 5.7 wvo HC................................... 19 ) Table 13A. GEMER Results for Single BU-7 Containers 50.0 kg U(3.50)O2 and H2 O................................................ 20 Table 13B. GEMER Results for Single BU-7 Containers 50.0 kg U(3.50)O2 and H20 + 5.7 wvo HC................................... 20 Table 14A. GEMER Results for Single BU-7 Containers 65.0 kg U(3.06)O2 and H2 O................................................ 21 Table 14B. GEMER Results for Single BU-7 Containers 65.0 kg U(3.06)O2 i and H2O + 5.7 wvo HC.................................. 21 i ~ O Table 15A. GEMER Results for Single BU-7 Containers 70.0 kg U(2.86)O2 and H2 O................................................ 22 i

Table 15B. GEhER Results for Single BU-7 Containers 70.0 kg U(2.86)O2 h' and H20 + 5.7 wt/o HC................................... 22 Table 16A. GEMER Results for an Infinite Triangular Array of BU-7 Containers 70.0 kg U(5.00)O2 and 5.0 wt/o H2O................ ~23 Table 16B. GEhER Results for an Infinite Triangular Array of BU-7 Containers 70.0 kg U(5.00)O2 and 5.0 wt/o H2O + 5.7 wt/o HC.... 23 Table 17A. GEhER Results for an 9x7x4 Triangular Array of Damaged BU-7s (Limiting UO2 Masses and Enrichments)...................... 25 Table 17B. GEhER Results for an 9x7x4 Triangular Array of Damaged BU-7s (Limiting UO2 Masses and Enrichments with 5.7 wt/o Hydrocarbon) 26 Table 18. GEhER Results for a Triangular Array of Damaged BU-7s 30.0 kg U(5.00)O2 and 50.0 wt/o H2O........................ 27 'l Table 19. UO2 Mass Limits Versus Enrichment...................... 28 O O

= l ' August 31,1993 Page 1 of29 } l Criticality Safety Analysis: BU-7 Shipping Container for Below 5.0% Enriched UO Powder with Failure of Containment and Moderation-2 Control L INTRODUCTION Model BU-7 shipping containers are used by the General Electric Company for the transportation of low-enriched unirradiated uranium dioxide powder, pellets and scrap. The BU-7 235U enrichmentof i container is a Fissile Class I package which is currently licensed for a maximum 5.0% for powder and 4.0% for pellets and scrap. In the previous case for enrichments below 4.0%, the containers were restricted to two 5 gallon pails or three 3 gallon pails which are limited in contents to no more than 70 kg of UO2 Powder or two safe batches of UO2 Pellets (or powder) per package. Each package was also limited in the amount of hydrogenous moderation that may be present in the fuel. In a prioranalysis for UO powder enriched in the range of 4.0% to 5.0%, the BU-7 container f 2 was demonstrated to comply with Fissile Class I requirements for conditions in which the inner l containment vessel does not prevent water flooding under the hypothetical accident conditions specified in 10CFR71.57. It was also considered in that analysis that the five or three gallon pails losetheirintegrityand thatthe UO2 Powder in each drum is mixed with the water in the BU-7's inner Each container was restricted to UO mass limits as follows: 35.,0 kg UO for containmentvessel. 2 2 enrichments greater than 4.0% but no more than 4.25%,32.5 kg UO for enrichments greater than 2 4.25% but no more than 4.50%,30.0 kg UO enrichments greater than 4.50% but no more than 2 4.75%, and 27.5 kg UO for enrichments greater than 4.75% but no more than 5.0%. The normal 2 case restriction for the fuel contents to a H/U atomic ratio of 0.45 was applied, but the contents were limited so that the' total mass of hydmgenous moderator in the inner containment vessel was no greater than 1000 grams or 3.6% of the weight of the uranium dioxide, whichever was smaller. In the present analysis for powder enrichments below 5.0%, the BU-7 container is demonstrated to comply with Fissile Class I requirements for conditions in which the inner containment vessel does not prevent water flooding under the hypothetical accident conditions i specifiedin 10CFR71.57. It is also considered in this analysis that the five or three gallon pails lose their integrity and that the UO2 Powder in each drum is mixed with the water in the BU-7's inner containment vessel. Each container is restricted to UO mass limits as follows: 30.0 kg UO for i 2 2 enrichments greater than 4.85% but no more than 5.0%,31.0 kg UO for enrichments greater than 2 4.60% but no more than 4.85%,35.0 kg UO for enrichments greater than 4.32% but no more than 2 4.60%,38.0 kg UO for enrichments greater than 4.10% but no more than 4.32%,40.0 kg UO for 2 2 enrichments greater than 3.50% but no more than 4.10%,50.0 kg UO for enrichments greater than 2 3.06% but no more than 3.50%,65.0 kg UO for enrichments greater than 2.86% but no more than 2 3.06%, and 70.0 kg UO forenrichments at or below 2.86%. The normal case restriction of the fuel 2 contents to a H/U atomic ratio of 1.6 still applies, but the contents must be limited so that the total i mass of hydrogenous moderator in the inner containment vessel is no greater than 1750 grams'or i 5.0% of the weight of the uranium dioxide, whichever is smaller. Specifications for the geometry and materials of construction of the BU-7 container. 5 and 3 gallon pails are the same as those for the existing Certificate [1] with one exception. A liner l

August 31,1993 Page2 of29 containing a strong neutron absorbing material has been added to the inside drum, surrounding the pails of UO2 Powder. The liner is made from "Boral," which is essentially a B4C and Aluminum compound. The liner is composed of 0.080 inches (minimum, 0.085 nominal) of Boral, sandwiched between two sheets of 0.026 inch (minimum,0.030 nominal) stainless steel. The Boral liner has a minimum height of 26.0 inches and is designed to fit against the inner drum of the BU-7. The Boral material has a minimum density of Bio atoms per unit surface area of 0.011 2 g/cm, O O i

August 31,1993 Page 3 of 29 O II. ANALYSIS A. BU-7 Container The BU-7 shipping container consists of a 55 gallon DOT Specification 17H outer drum 3 constmeted of 18-gauge steel. The outer drum contains 7 -9 lbs/ft fire-retardant phenolic resin insulation sandwiched between it and a 13.75 to 14.05 inch diameter by nominal 27 inch long steel innerdrum. The inner drum (also described as the " inner containment vessel'1, has a gasket and is sealed with a bolted metal lid to insure water tightness, and normally holds two 5 gallon pails or three 3 gallon pails. A liner of Boral is included inside the inner containment vessel. Figure 1 depicts the container with a cutaway section showing the internal container and the phenolic resin. B. General Requirements for Fissile Class I Shipping Containers As specified in Parts 71.55 and 71.57 of Reference 2, the criticality safety requirements for a Fissile Class I shipping container are that suberiticality be maintained for the following: 1. Sincle Containers - with the most reactive cmdible configuration of the package and contents, including moderation by water, and assuming close reflection by water on all sides. 2. Infinite Arrays of Containers - undamaged, in any arrangement with optimum interspersed hydrogenous moderation.

3. Arrays of Damaced Containers - two hundred and fifty " damaged" containers stacked together in any arrangement, closely reflected on all sides by water and with optimum interspersed hydrogenous moderation. " Damaged" means in the condition resulting from being subjected to the " Hypothetical Accident Conditions" specified in Part 71.73 of the Rules and Regulations.

The " Hypothetical Accident Conditions" tests were conducted for the BU-7 container in 1979-80 and are reported in Reference 3. The results of the tests showed that while deformation of the outer 55 gallon drum occurred at the points of contact, there was no evidence of punctures, fractures or separation of the container sides from the bottoms. No damage was found to the sealing features or the integrity of the inner container or the UO2 Powder pails inside it. After the fire and water immersion tests, the inner container remained dry, the silicone rubber gasket sealing it was undamaged, and no significant increase in the moisture content in the powder was found. The report concluded that in the tests, the outercontainerdid not suffer any significant damage that would affect criticality safety considerations. Notwithstanding the results of these tests, the current analysis will take into consideration accident conditions in which water is assumed to enter the inner containment vessel and the UO2 mwder; the three or five gallon pails spill out into the larger inner containment vessel and UO2 pe vder mixes with the water. For simplicity in modelling, the three and/or five gallon pails will wnservatively be omitted from the analysis and the water and UO mixture will be modelled solely 2 in theinner containment vessel. The phenolic resin will also be considered to absorb water and the O same amount of water analyzed eetside of the coetainer wiii be assemed te be gre,ent ie the resin. This includes full density water for water reflection of the single container.

August 31,1993 Page 4 of 29 ~1 !Iy: l

• 1 si E'

!i,::u:l$..!:lil h!, ) i i $O hi .j,d:i.e...!! g I i i.i.o t rn. I a la g. s g I ir / j mE ((l I r i !r i E =j'3lI,li sg s e r i. c ! . I gr is g-N- gi g -p a 9

e!]!!I!I 3 ' ll in j

0 i 5 111 i 9 y Igg s 4 e

!ilil!j-lQ"!!

i i l i" S i lis il 1 I ! .d i: lpf !s!! a !. gf ! - 8 ,.l r i. a.,..

o.,

m y, I o i v mg s m m. 5 1g .!s l b_ r. _ i g,. 5: s6 i i g !uz vi

31. is

%p i I o 5: s Pld 1] g sg iff i i =;l Ev e g!, b L ijl

2l g

h:, hi !!!v h i*{tI I . ;! 5* s k I !I !h @i'! dps eE se i l Gi Ir 8j g'

LllN,

! = v ;, il (. --I-- si !!! iiji y d

.5 th!

/ \\ \\ f' i!! 7 Ji 1, i M i i ^ g/ / a 1 g ~ c; ( // // /r

d!

IN // // // l 1 0,. .ti). I 't e = s =rd l a I lIE: l 8 g!sj 10 t .a r t fri. 1 2 l a r \\ ..s, ,c \\ os i j g-SI o d ~ gis[ll g t p, m\\-Q Sii i; !='> s.it

adi, y-HE

~ mu 8 e i o i 4

August 31,1993 Page5 of29 i i UO Powder nnd Water Mixtures C. 2 1 Previous criticality safety analyses of the 13U-7 container are documented in References 4,5, 6 and 7.- For the present analysis, the contents of the container are taken to be within the inner containment vessel (incl'iding liner) with uranium dioxide powder enriched up to 5.0% in U235, which is restricted in moderation to a H/U atomic ratio of 1.6. The fuelis modelled as UO and 2 water and therefore applies to all uranium dioxide powders having theoretical densities no greater i 3 than 10.96 g/cm. Mixtures of fuel and water have been analyzed in the following manner. The mixture components are considered to occupy the minimum volume possible and have a maximum density. A volume balance for the mixture can be written as (I) Tuo + IHO"Imix 2 2 or i L")1 2 (2) r 4 M + \\ N )1 O = Uo2 / II 0 / mix A 2 Rearranging (2) gives an expression for the mixture density .-1 '(1 - WFg o) W F,i,o O m + o-1, = - Quo eH e 2 2 where "WF" refers to the weight fraction (or mass fraction) mg,o (4) WFg20 = n'uO + HO 2 2 Multiplying the mixture density by a weight fraction gives a component density of that - constituent. In this context, " component" refers to treating the molecules or atoms of a substance as spread over the larger volume of the mixture. The component density of a substance within a I mixture is always less than the constituent theoretical density since the same mass (e.g., UO2 or water) is dispersed over more volume. For example, the maximum density mixture corresponding to 1.5% water (i.e., WFH2O = 3 3 3 This 0.015) is that with emix = 9.53541 g/cm, Quo 2 = 9.3924 g/cm, and OH2O = 0.1430 g/cm mixture has an 11/U atomic ratio of 0.4563. The constituent densities are OUo2 (theoretical)= 10.96 3 3 g/cm and OH2O (theoretical)= 1.0 g/cm. 4 Material atom densities are calculated from the mixture density by the standard formula j Nx = 0x N3 = WFx Om;x N3 (5) where NA is Avogadro's number and Mx is the molecular weight of"x"in gm/ mole. Selected atom densities are presented in Table 1.

August 31,1993 Page 6 of29 Table 1. Atom Densities for Maximum Density Mistures of UO and 110 2 2 Enrich-WFno N U235 NU238 No Na ment (%) (atoms /bam-cm) (atoms /bam-cm) (atoms /bam-cm) (atoms /bam-cm) 2.86 0.40 8.52210E-05 2.85800FA3 3.5314E-02 5.88560E4)2 2.95 0.40 8.79160E-05 2.85575FA3 3.53140FA2 5.88560E-02 3.06 0.35 1.09761E4)4 3.43328E-03 3.56930E-02 5.72160E4)2 3.10 0.35 1.lll30E-04 3.43186FA3 3.56930E-02 5.72160E-02 3.50 0.40 1.04290E-04 2.83910E-03 3.53150E-02 5.88560FA2 4.10 0.45 1.01830E4)4 2.35173E-03 3.50050E4)2 6.01980FA2 4.32 0.50 8.94030E-05 1.95510E-03 3.47470E-02 6.13170E4)2 4.60 0.45 1.14248E4)4 2.33948E-03 3.50050E-02 6.01980E4)2 4.85 0.50 1.00387E4)4 1.94458E-03 3.47470E-02 6.13170E-02 5.00 0.50 1.03470E4)4 1.94120FA3 3.47480FA2 6.13170FA2 3 For full density water (gn:o = 1.00 g/cm ) Na = 6.6743E-02 atoms / barn-cm and No = 3.3372E-02 atoms /bam-cm. Partial density " interspersed moderation" atom densities are detemiined by taking the appropriate fraction of these values. g The value given for the 5.00?c enrichment band is still taken to be the maximum possible U235 enrichment value to be used in the BU-7 since control of the enrichment coming into the facility is currently restricted to not more than 5.00?c maximum enrichment. The upper enrichment band is therefore assumed to remain the same as in the previous analysis. UO Powder and Water Mistures with Ilydrocarbon Additive D. 2 All cases were analyzed considering the use of additives bearing hydrogen and carbon (specifically ammonium oxalate and ammonium bicarbonate) in UO powder being shipped using 2 the BU-7 as a Fissile Class I shipping container. This is accomplished by including a carbon additive in the containers and showing that any increase in neutron multiplication results in the container array still remaining suberitical. The contents of the container are taken to be the maximum uranium dioxide powder enrichment in U235 (to include the effect of tolerances on enrichment) and conesponding masses detennined from the accident condition analysis. The case where no water mixes with the UO2 powder is restricted in moderation to a H/U atomic ratio of 1.6 (that is 5 "'/o H O) and a C/U ratio of 2 1.27. With the additional restriction that the H/C ratio of the additive must be not less than 1, this 2 powder with 50,000 ppm H O and 57,000 ppm hydrocarbon fuel is the equivalent of UO 2 additive. For simplicity, it has been assumed that a hydrocarbon molecule "HC" is present in the fuel mhei constituents of the ammonium oxalate and ammonium bicarbonate compounds are The fuel is modelled as UO and water and therefore applies to all uranium ignored in the analysis. 2 dioxide powders having theoretical densities no greater than 10.96 g/cm. The additive is modelled h 3 3 as having a theoretical CxH density no greater than 0.72 g/cm y

August 31,1993 Page 7 of29 O wixtures of fueiana-ter aeve bee nairzea-ita fixea-eis ifr=ctio of a aree <8oo n v present in the mixture. The weight fraction of carbon was determined based on the " normal" condition where CN = 1.27 and H/U = 1.6, with the additional constraint C/H = 1. Fixing the weight fraction (as opposed to the HC mass) is conservative since the mass of hydrocarbon in the system has been allowed to increase as wateris added to the mixture. Samplenumberdensitiesare shown in Table 2. Mixtures of fuel, water and hydrocarbon have been analyzed by considering mixtures occupying the minimum volume possible and having the maximum densities. When hydmcarbon is present, the density of the mixture is given by ,-1 (1 - WF,i,o - WF c) WF,o WFue H it b"' 0u0 GH O Onc 2 2 where the weight fractions are given by mg'o (7) WFH O = mU0 + *H O + mHC 2 2 2 and = 0.057 (8) WF c = m + mg,o + muc H uo2 The number densities can be found from Equation (5). Table 2. Atom Densities for Maximum Density Mixtures of U(E)O and II 0 with 5.7 '"/o 2 2 Hydrocarbon Additive Enrich-WF 2O NU235 NU238 No NH Nc H ment (%) (atoms /bam-(atoms /bam-(atoms / barn-(atoms / barn-(atoms /bam-cm) cm) em) cm) cm) 4.10 0.50 7.4721E4)5 1.7257E-03 3.0599E4)2 5.8252E4)2 4.2554E4)2 4.10 0.45 8.8698E-05 2.0485E-03 3.0496E4)2 5.7035E-02 4.5921E-03 4.10 0.40 1.0508E-04 2.4267E-03 3.0375E-02 5.5609E4)2 4.9868E4)3 5.00 0.55 7.6406E-05 1.4334E-03 3.0689E4)2 5.9303E-02 3.9646E-03 5.00 0.50 9.1122E-05 1.7094E4)3 3.0599E-02 5.8252E4)2 4.2554E-03 5.00 0.45 1.0817E-04 2.0292E-03 3.0496E-02 5.7035E4)2 4.5921E-03 5,00 0.40 1.2814E-04 2.4039E-03 3.0375E4)2 5.5608E4)2 4.9868E-03 E. Materials of Construction t]v The major constituents of the BU-7 container are the carbon steel drums and phenolic 3 resin. Carbon steel has a density of 7.82 g/cm and its component atom densities are 3.921E-03

August 31,1993 Page 8 of 29 atoms /bam-cm for carbon and 8.3491E-02 foriron. Stainless steel, if used for construction, is a better neutron absorber than is the carbon steel. Thus, the analysis applies to the BU-7 container constructed of stainless steel as well as those constructed of carbon steel. 3 The density of phenolic resin compound with the minimum specification (i.e.,7 lbs/ft ) is given below. One-hundred percent of the minimum specified phenolic resin density is used in this analysis, although no credit has been taken for bomn which is present. Table 3. Phenolic Resin Atom Densities in the BU-7 Container Element Atom Density (Atom /bam-cm) Hydrogen 3.0140E-03 Boron 10 0.0000E+00 Boron 11 0.0000EM)0 Carbon 2.3050E-03 Oxygen 2.0510E-03 Silicon 5.2890E-05 Table 4 gives the constituent elements and associated atom densities for the Boral liner. As an added conservatism in the treatment of the liner, only 75% of the minimum specified density is h IO atoms are included in the liner for the analysis). used in the analysis (only 75% of the B Table 4. Boral Liner Atom Densities Element Atom Density (Atom /bam-cm) Carbon 3.0675E-03 l Boron 10 2.4418E-03 Boron 11 9.8285E-03 Aluminum 4.5406E-02 F. Analytical Method Neutron multiplication factor calculations in this criticality analysis have been performed l l with the GEMER Monte Carlo code [8]. GEMER is a modified version of the Battelle Northwest Laboratory's BMC Monte Carlo code which has been combined with the geometry handling i subroutines in KENO IV. Cross section sets in GEMER are processed from the ENDF/B-IV library in 190 broadgroup and resonance parameter formats except for thermal scattering in water which is represented by the Haywood Kemel in the ENDF/B library. In GEMER, the resonance parameters describe the cross sections in the resonance energy range and Monte Carlo sampling in this range is done from the resonance kernels rather than from the broad group cross sections. Bus, there is a single, unique cross section set associated with each available isotope and dependence is not placed on Dancoff (flux shadowing) correction factors or effective scattering

August 31,1993 Page 9 of 29 cross sections. The cross section library includes fission, capture, elastic, inelastic, and (n,2n) reactions. Absorption is implicitly treated by applying the non-absorption pmbability to netitron weights at each collision point. GEMER's bias has been determmed (from an extcasive validation against critical experiments) to vary from +0.006 to -0.012 over the range of moderation in the fuel mixtures consideredin this analysis. For under-moderated mixtures with H/U atomic ratios less than about 5, the bias is positive denotin g that neutron multiplication factors are over-predicted. The biasthen decreases almost linearly to -4).015 at an H/U ratio of about 25. These values span the range considered for the BU-7 container since the highest degree of moderation (that for the UO and H O 2 2 mixture with a WFH2O of 0.40) corresponds to an H/U ratio of about 20. Since the biasis positive for H/U ratios less than 5, it can be ignored for the anay calculations involving undamaged containers. For the calculations involving the sin gle container and a damaged array of containers, a value of-0.012 is conservative. G. Modelling of Geometry The geometry model used in this analysis of the BU-7 container is illustrated in Figure 2 and the GEMER geometry input is tabulated in Tables 3 through 5. The BU-7 was modelled with the 35.40 cm diameter,70.2 cm high inner containment vessel filled with UO and water to the 2 appropriate height (to accommodate the volume of the mixture). The heights were essentially determined by dividing the applicable UO mass limit (e.g.,30.0 kg at 5.0% enrichment) by the 2 product of the UO density for the mixture and the Boralliner's inside area area. Note that due to a O 2 difference between the minimum liner height (26 inches or 66.04 cm) and the height of the inner containment vessel (27.6 inches or 70.2 cm), a 4.16 cm gap exists. This gap in height is conservatively modelled by aligning the liner against the top of the inner drum, so that the UO and 2 water mixture is not surrounded by boron in the bottom of the vessel. This smallamount of volume ~ is accounted for in the mixture height calculation. The Borallineris modelled as having a minimum thickness and maximum outer radius ti.e., the liner is treated as if it were tlush against the wall of the inner containment vessel). This treatment maximizes the outer radius of the UO and water mixture. While this modelling results 2 in the maximum mass of liner material in the BU-7, the effect of the maximizing the Boral mass is relatively small in comparison with the impact of the geometric buckling. Maximizing the radius of the liner is a conservative treatment in the calculations. For the Single Container case, the BU-7's outer 55 gallon drum is tightly reflected on all 6 sides by at least 30 cm of full density water and water was assumed to leak into the inner containment vessel to the extent of optimum moderation within the container. Fulldensity wateris alsoadded to the phenolic resin (Regions 4 and 6 in Table 3). For the case of Infinite Arrays of Normal Containers, the model in Figure 2 is spatially reflected on all six sides with varying amounts ofinterspersed waterin the phenolic resin (Regions 4 The UO contents for this case and 6 in Table 4) and in the regions outside of the outer container. 2 only is taken conservatively to be 70 kg U(5.00%)O + 0.05 H 0. This total amount of UO in the 2 2 2 O inner containment ves el i well above the e tablished mass loading limits, which are set by the accident condition arrays, but it is used here as a bounding condition. It has been shown previously

August 31,1993 Pageloof29 [6] that when the fuel mixture is " smeared" from the minimum to maximum volume, thereby h occupying the entire volume but reducing the material densities, the effective multiplication value goes down. Therefore, the maximum fuel mixture densities and their corresponding heights are used in this analysis. For the accident case of the Arrays of Damaged Containers, the array was modelled as an 9 x 7 x 4 triangular pitch array of BU-7 containers tightly reflected on all six sides by at least 30 cm of The 9 x 7 x 4 triangular array is the one having a minimum of at least 250 units (it has 252 water. units) whose dimension is closest to a cube and therefore which has the minimum geometrical buckling (maximum neutron multiplication). Each BU-7 was modelled as in Figure 2 and the interspersed water was again added to the phenolic resin insulation. Theaccidentcase modeltakes into consideration only maximum density UO2 + H O mixtures since mixtures " smeared"into larger 2 volumes will yield lower keg values. O O

August 31,1993 Page il of29 17.70 28.57 Z 5 c-------------------- 453692 - - - - - - ----- Intuagid Water 44.4167 - - - - - - Larbon 5 teel l 44308 - - - - - - Phenolic Resin l 36.688 - - - - - - Interspersed Water C 35.5763 - - - - - - a 35.10 - - - - - - r i b o n BoralLiner S t e e 1 UO + H O 2 2 -30.94- - - - - - - -3 5.10 - - - - - - Carbon sicci -35.2087 - - - - - - Phenolic Resin t -42.8287 - - - - - - 42.9374 - - - - - - Carbon Steet Interspersed Water l --14.M24 4 { 17.808 23.495 28.684 O 17.363 Figure 2 GEMER Geometry Model for BU-7 Container r

August 31,1993 Page 12of 29 Thble 5 GEMER Geometry Model for Single Containers (GEMER Inputs) 1) CYLINDER 1 17.363 XX.XX * -30.94 16*0.5 2) CYLINDER 2 17.364 35.10 -30.94 16*0.5 80 mil 3) CYLINDER 3 17.429 35.10 -30.94 16*0.5 ' Boral 4) CYLINDER 6 17.632 35.10 -30.94 16*0.5 + 5) CYLINDER 3 17.698 35.10 -30.94 16*0.5 26 mil 6) CYLINDER 4 17.699 35.10 -30.94 16*0.5 ' Steel 7) CYLINDER 1 17.700 35.10 -35.10 16*0.5 (x 2) 8) CYLINDER 3 17.808 35.5763 -35.2087 16*0.5 9) CYLINDER 5 23.495 35.5763 --42.8287 16*0.5 10) CYLINDER 2 23.4955 36.688 -42.8287 16*0.5 11) CYLINDER 5 28.575 44.308 -42.8287 16*0.5 12) CYLINDER 3 28.5755 44.4167 -42.9374 16*0.5 13) CYLINDER 2 28.576 45.3692 --$4.8424 16*0.5 14) CYLINDER 3 28.684 45.3692 -44.8424 16*0.5 15) CUBOID 4 28.685 -28.685 28.685 -28.685 45.3692 -44.8424 16*0.5 16) CORE O 28.685 -28.685 28.685 -28.685 45.3692 -44.8424 16*0.5 17) CUBOID 4 60.0 -60.0 60.0 -60.0 76.0 -76.0 16*0.5 Notes: Numbers 1 through 17 noted on the left are for information only and are not part of geometry input. h

• Determined from the height of the fuel mixture.

UO + H O Materials: 1 2 2 2 Interspersed Water (0 weight fmetion) 3 Carbon Steel 4 Water Reflector (Full Density Water) 5 Phenolic Resin 6 Boral(Aluminum and B4C) O' ~

~ August 31,1993 Page 13cf29 Q Table 6 GEMER Geometry Model for an Infinite Triangular Array of Containers i 1) -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 2) BOX TYPE 1 3) CYLINDER 1 17.363 XX.XX * -30.94 16*0.5 4) CYLINDER : 2 17.364 35.10 -30.94 16*0.5 5) CYLINDER 3 17.429 35.10 -30.94 16*0.5 6) CYLINDER 6 17.632 35.10 -30.94 16*0.5 i 7) CYLINDER 3 17.698 35.10 -30.94 16*0.5 8) CYLINDER 4 17.699 35.10 -30.94 16*0.5 9) CYLINDER 1 17.700 35.10 -35.10 16*0.5 10) CYLINDER 3 17.808 35.5763 -35.2087 16*0.5 11) CYLINDER 5 23.495 35.5763 -42.8287 16*0.5 12) CYLINDER 2 23.4955 36.688 4 2.8287 16*0,5 13) CYLINDER 5 28.575 44.308 -42.8287 16*0.5 14) CYLINDER 3 28.5755 44.4167- --12.9374 16*0,5 15) CYLINDER 2 28.576 45.3692 -44.8424 16*0.5 t 16) CYLINDER 3 28.684 45.3692 -54.8424 16*0.5 l 17) BOX TYPE 2 18) CUBOID 2 28.685 -28.685 24.85 -24.85 45.3692 -44.8424 16*0.5 19) 21111111111 20) BEGIN COMPLEX O 21) COuPtEx 2i -28.685-24.850.021157.370.00.0 22) COMPLEX 21 0.024.850.01110.00.00.0 t Notes: Numbers 1 through 22 noted on the left are for information only and are not part of geometry input.

• Determined from the height of the fuel mixture.

UO + H O Materials: 1 2 2 2 Interspersed Water (0 to 1.0 weight fraction) 3 Carbon Steel 4 Water Reflector (Full Density Water) 5 Phenolic Resin 6 Boral(Aluminum and B C) 4 7 4 b O

August 31,1993 Page 14cf 29 Table 7 GEMER Geometry Model for a Triangular Array of Damaged Containers 1) BOX TYPE 1 2) CYLINDER 1 17.363 XX.XX * -30.94 16*0.5 3) CYLINDER 4 17.364 35.10 -30.94 16*0.5 4) CYLINDER 3 17.429 35.10 -30.94 16*0.5 5) CYLINDER 6 17.632 35.10 -30.94 16*0.5 6) CYLINDER 3 17.698 35.10 -30.94 16*0.5 7) CYLINDER 4 17.699 35.10 -30.94 16*0.5 8) CYLINDER 1 17,700 35.10 -35.10 16*0.5 9) CYLINDER 3 17.808 35.5763 -35.2087 16*0.5 10) CYLINDER 5 23.495 35.5763 -42.8287 16*0.5 11) CYLINDER 2 23.4955 36.688 --42.8287 16*0.5 12) CYLINDER 5 28.575 44.308 -42.8287 16*0.5 13) CYLINDER 3 28.5755 44.4167 -42.9374 16*0.5 14) CYLINDER 2 28.576 45.3692 -44.8424 16*0.5 15) CYLINDER 3 28.684 45.3692 14.8424 16*0.5 16) BOX TYPE 2 17) CUBOID 2 215.15 -215.15 227.7 -227.7 45.3692 -4 4.8424 16*0.5 18) CORE O 215.15 -215.15 227.7 -227.7 181.4768 -179.3696 16*0.5 19) CUBOID 4 245.63 -245.63 258.18 -258.18 212.0 -210.0 16*0.5 20) 21111111411 21) BEGIN COMPLEX g 22) COMPLEX 2 1 -186.465 -199.015 0.0 7 5 1 57.37 99.50 0.0 23) COMPLEX 2 1 -157.78 -149.266 0.0 7 4 1 57.37 99.50 0.0 Notes: Numbers 1 through 23 noted on the left are for information only and are not part of geometry input.

• Determined from the height of the fuel mixture.

UO + H O Materials: 1 2 2 2 Interspersed Water (0 weight fraction) 3 Carbon Steel 4 Water Reflector (Full Density Water) 5 Phenolic Resin 6 Boral(Aluminum and B4C) O

Augnt 31,1993 Page ISof29 IIL CRITICALITY SAFETY ANALYSIS RESULTS The following sections summanze the results of the GEMER calculations performed for the fuel mixtures and geometry models described in Section II. The results are all suberitical with the most limiting case being the accident condition array with zero interspersed water. A. Single Containers Tables 8 through 15 show k-effective values for various weight fractions ofmoderator (in the UO2 and water mixture). The sets of tables correspond to the limiting mass / enrichment pairs determined from the accident array analysis. The first table of each set (A)is for the case where no hydrocarbon is present; the second table (B) corresponds to the case where 0.057 weight fraction of hydrocarbon is present in the mixture. All of the results are suberitical. The largest k-effective values (corresponding to optimum moderation) appear in boldface. t GEMER Results for Single BU-7 Containers Table 8 A. 30.0 kg U(5.00)O and II 0 2 2 WFH2O kett a kefr + 2a 0.10 0.26915 0.00175 0.27265 0.20 0.49733 0.00299 0.50331 0 0.30 0.68503 0.00295 0.e9093 0.40 0.79923 0.00326 0.80575 0.50 O.84230 0.00315 0.84860 0.60 0.82231 0.00250 0.82731 t Table 8B. GEMER Results for Single BU-7 Containers 30.0 kg U(5.00)O and II 0 + 5.7 *t/o IIC 2 2 WFH2O kery ta kerr + 20 0.10 0.35835 0.00233 0.36301 0.20 0.57691 0.00270 0.58231 0.30 0.73289 0.00317 0.73923 0.40 0.82592 0.00272 0.83136 0.50 0.84392 0.00292 0.84976 0.60 0.81130 0.00252 0.81634 t Neutron multiplication factors based on the fission particle flux method. O 1

August 31,1993 Page 16of 29 GEMER Results for Single BU-7 Containers h t Table 9A. 31.0 kg U(4.85)O and H O 2 2 WFH2O keft c keff + 2a 0.10 0.27429 0.00180 0.27789 0.20 0.49904 0.00298 0.50500 0.30 0.70032 0.00312 0.70656 0.40 0.80469 0.00294 0.81057 0.50 0.83980 0.00265 0.84510 0.60 0.82230 0.00253 0.82736 t GEMER Results for Single BU-7 Containers Table 9B. 31.0 kg U(4.85)O and H O + 5.7 "'/o HC 2 2 WFH2O keg a keg + 2a 0.10 0.36433 0.00245 0.36923 0.20 0.59289 0.00319 0.59927 g 0.30 0.74018 0.00317 0.74652 0.40 0.82055 0.00293 0.82641 j 0.50 0.83670 0.00295 0.84260 O.60 0.80113 0.00251 0.80615 t Neutron multiplication factors based on the fission particle flux method. ) O i

August 31,1993 Page 170f 29 [} t GEMER Results for Single BU-7 Containers Table 10A. 35.0 kg U(4.60)O and H2O 2 WFH2O keg io keg +2a 0.10 0.30925 0.00185 0.31295 0.20 0.54809 0.00273 0.55355 0.30 0.72628 0.00289 0.73206 0.40 0.82363 0.00327 0.83017 0.50 0.84402 0.00276 0.84954 0.60 0.81130 0.00261 0.81652 t GEMER Results for Single BU-7 Containers Table 108. 35.0 kg U(4.60)O and H O + 5.7 "Vo IIC 2 2 WFH2O keg a keg + 20 0.10 0.40586 0.00255 0.41096 0.20 0.62897 0.00286 0.63469 O o 3o o.7694o o.00324 0.77588 0.40 0.83188 0.00329 0.83846 0.84067 0.00285 0.84637 0.50 0.57 + 0.81413 0.00238 0.81889 t Neutron multiplication factors based on the fission particle flux method. Full container (i.e.. the UO and water mixture is within 2 cm of the inside rim of the + 2 BU-71 Increasing the weight fraction of water in the mixture results in reduced UO mass for the 2 calculation. I i O i l

August 31,1993 l Page 18af 29 [ h GEMER Results for Single BU-7 Containers T Table 11A. 38.0 kg U(4.32)O and H O 2 2 1 WFH2O keg o keg + 20 0.10 0.32310 0.00241 0.32792 0.20 0.58391 0.00290 0.58971 ] 0.30 0.75193 0.00324 0.75841 0.40 0.82723 0.00297 0.83317 0.50 0.84375 0.00264 0.84903 t l 0.60 0.79667 0.00257 0.80181 t GEMER Results for Single BU-7 Containers Table 11B. 38.0 kg U(4.32)O and II 0 + 5.7 **/o IIC 2 2 WFH2O keft a keft + 20 0.10 0.43396 0.00269 0.43934 0.20 0.64908 0.00303 0.65514 j 0.30 0.77978 0.00334 0.78646 g 0.40 0.83464 0.00322 0.84108 0.50 0.82780 0.00248 0.83276 0.55' O.81127 0.00241 0.81609 Neutron multiplication factors based on the fission particle flux method. + Full container (i.e., the UO and water mixture is within 2 cm of the inside rim of the 2 BU-7L Increasing the weight fraction of water in the mixture results in reduced UO2 mass for the calculation. O

August 31,1993 Page 19af 29 GEMER Results for Single BU-7 Containers t hble 12A. 40.0 kg U(4.10)O and II 0 2 2 WFH2O keg io keg + 2a 0.10 0.33361 0.00216 0.33793 l 0.20 0.59070 0.00270 0.59610 0.30 0.75568 0.00294 0.76156 0.40 0.83153 0.00263 0.83679 0.50 0.83367 0.00283 0.83933 0.60 0.78873 0.00207 0.79287 t Table 12B. GEMER Results for Single BU-7 Containers 40.0 kg U(4.10)O and II 0 + 5.7 "'/o IIC 2 2 WFH2O kerr io keft + 20 0.10 0.44422 0.00249 0.44920 0.20 0.65580 0.00270 0.66120 Q 0.30 0.78752 0.00323 0.79398 0.40 0.83270 0.00261 0.83792 0.50 0.81684 0.00269 0.82222 0.53 + 0.80558 0.00258 0.81074 i Neutron multiplication factors based on the fission particle flux method. Full container (i.e.. the UO and water mixture is within 2 cm of the inside rim of the 2 B U-7). Increasing the weight fmetion of water in the mixture results in reduced UO mass for the 2 calculation. i l O

August 31,1993 Page 200f 29 t GEMER Results for Single BU-7 Containers 'Ihble 13A. 50.0 kg U(3.50)O and H2O 2 WF 2O keg ta keg + 2a H 0.10 0.40324 0.00204 0.40732 O.20 0.66464 0.00293 0.67050 0.30 0.78526 0.00327 0.79180 0.40 0.82923 0.00306 0.83535 0.50 0.81467 0.00249 0.81965 0.55+ 0.77871 0.00241 0.78353 GEMER Results for Single BU-7 Containers t Table 13B. 50.0 kg U(3.50)O2 and H2O + 5.7 "'/o HC WFH2O keg a keg + 2a 0.10 0.51134 0.00292 0.51718 0.20 0.70654 0.00319 0.71292 g 0.30 0.80282 0.00332 0.80946 0.40 0.81395 0.00280 0.81955 0.48+ 0.80254 0.00248 0.80750 t Neutron multiplication factors based on the fission particle flux method. $ Full container (i.e., the UO and water mixture is within 2 cm of the inside rim of the 2 Increasing the weight fraction of water in the mixture results in reduced UO mass for the 2 BU-7L calculation. O

August 31,1993 Page 21of 29 i GEMER Results for Single BU-7 Containers Tatble 14A. 65.0 kg U(3.06)O2 and H O 2 WFH2O keg io keg + 20 0.10 0.47465 0.00282 0.48029 0.20 0.72619 0.00285 0.73189 0.30 0.81386 0.00278 0.81942 0.40 0.82654 0.00265 0.83184 0.483 0.79564 0.00234 0.80032 t GEMER Results for Single BU-7 Containers Table 14B. 65.0 kg U(3.06)O and 110 + 5.7 "'/o IIC 2 2 WFH2O keg io keg + 20 0.10 0.58072 0.00288 0.58648 0.20 0.74961 0.00267 0.75495 0.30 0.81577 0.00262 0.82101 O o 40 0.80800 0.00223 0.81246 0.41 + 0.80248 0.00242 0.80732 1 i Neutron multiplication factors based on the fission particle flux method. l Full container (i.e.. the UO and water mixture is within 2 cm of the inside rim of the 2 BU-7L Increasing the weight fraction of water in the mixture results in reduced UO mass for the 2 calculation. OO

\\ August 31,1993 Page 220f 29 GEMER Results for Single BU-7 Containers $l i Table 15A. 70.0 kg U(2.86)O and II 0 2 2 WFH2O keft o-keft + 2a 0.10 0.50349 0.00285 0.50919 0.20 0.73407 0.00284 0.73975 0.30 0.81719 0.00278 0.82275 0.40 0.81689 0.00244 0.82177 0.46* 0.79277 0.00249 0.79775 t GEMER Results for Single BU-7 Containers Table 15B. 70.0 kg U(2.86)O2 and II 0 + 5.7 "'/o IIC 2 WFH2O keft a kerr + 2a 0.10 0.58606 0.00276 0.59158 0.20 0.75437 0.00276 0.75989 0.30 0.80247 0.00255 0.80757 0.39* 0.79267 0.00262 0.79791 g i Neutron multiplication factors based on the fission particle flux rnethod. Full container (i.e., the UO and water mixture is within 2 cm of the inside rim of the 2 BU-7). Increasing the weight fraction of waterin the mixture resultsin reduced UO mass for the 2 calculation. II. Infinite Triangular Array of Undamaged Containers The results in Tables 16A and 16B show a maximum k-effective of less than 0.85 for the infinite array of BU-7 containers (also referred to as the normal condition). This is for the highly conservative and bounding case of 70 kg of 5.00% enriched UO, rather than the mass to which the 2 container is limited. These suberitical multiplication factors demonstrate that UO powder with 2 only 5% water is significantly under-moderated. Again, this represents a bounding condition and does not imply that such a mass loading is acceptable. However, the degree of subcriticality for the normal condition array of containers is clearly demonstrated by the two analyses (with and without hydrocarbon). O

August 31,1993 Page 23cf29 i GEMER Results for an Infinite Triangular Array of BU-7 Containers Table 16A. 70.0 kg U(5.00)O and 5.0 */o II 0 2 2 WFInterspersed H2O keg io keg + 2a O.00 0.65298 0.00252 0.65802 0.10 0.60130 0.00242 0.60614 0.20 0.60071 0.00260 0.60591 0.30 0.59478 0.00248 0.59974 l 0.40 0.59318 0.00250 0.59818 j 0.50 0.59239 0.00276 0.59791 0.60 0.59591 0.00257 0.60105 0.70 0.60253 0.00305 0.60863 0.80 0.61021 0.00258 0.61537 0.90 0.61756 0.00243 0.62242 1.00 0.61890 0.00235 0.62360 I 1 GEMER Results for an Infinite Trir.ngular Array of BU-7 Containers ) t Table 16B. 70.0 kg U(5.00)O and 5.0 *!o H O + 5.7 */o IIC ) 2 2 WF Interspersed H2O keg io keg + 20 0.00 0.80037 0.00302 0.80641 0.10 0.71307 0.00257 0.71821 0.20 0.68883 0.00276 0.69435 0.30 0.67292 0.00233 0.67758 0.40 0.66986 0.00292 0.67570 0.50 0.66893 0.00287 0.67467 0.60 0.66443 0.00277 0.66997 0.70 0.66270 0.00298 0.66866 0.80 0.67280 0.00262 0.67804 0.90 0.67873 0.00290 0.68453 1.00 0.67698 0.00271 0.68240 t Neutron multiplication factors based on the fission particle flux method. O I

August 31,1993 Page 24of29 C. Triangular Array of Damaged Containers As noted previously, the most reactive condition for the Fissile Class I BU-7 container assuming failure of containment by the product pails (either 3 or 5 gallon cans) and loss of moderation control, is the 9 x 7 x 4 triangular pitch array of damn ged containers. Thisis shown by the calculations summarized in Tables 17A and 17B. Note that in Tables 17A-B the results are-complete in that the values are given as a function of enrichment, UO mass and water content in the 2 mixture. This format verifies that the case for optimum moderation is shown and indicates consistency with other results within the analysis and with prior analyses. Earlier analyses have demonstrated that the optimum amount of interspersed water for the accident case is 0.0,just as it is for the array of undamaged containers. This is anindication that components in the phenolic resin and steel are more effective as absorbers when the neutrons are slowed down outside of the container. Table 18 supports this assertion; here the weight fraction of interspersed moderator has been varied for the 30 kg U(5.00%)O + 50.0 *% H O accident 2 2 This case had the highest k-effective at 5.00% enrichment (as shown in Table 17A). case. Since the maximum keft + 20 value is less than 0.9380 (the limit of suberiticality including the method bias), the BU-7 with the specified masses and enrichments U(E)O2 Per container (and with the assumptions of loss of containment and failure of moderation control) meets the applicable requirements for a Fissile Class I package. O l ) O I

August 31,1993 Page 25of29 i GEMER Results for an 9x7x4 Triangular Array of Damaged BU-7s Table 17A. (Limiting UO Masses and Enrichments) 2 \\ Enrichment UO2 Mass WF H2O kerr to keft + 20 ('"%) (kg) 030 0.89085 0.00251 0.89587 2.86 70.0 0.35' O.90387' O.00256 0.90899 O.40 0.90230 0.00193 0.90616 0.35 0.90935 0.00253 0.91441 3.M 65.0 0.40 0.91595 0.00226 0.92047 0.45 0.90315 0.00216 0.90747 0.40 0.90272 0.00271 0.91269 3.50 50.0 0.45 0.90336 0.00252 0.90840 0.50 0.89507 0.00217 0.89941 0.45 0.90756 0.00288 0.91332 4.10 40.0 0.50 0.91187 0.00295 0.91777 0.55 0.89407 0.00200 0.89807 0.40 0.90501 0.00260 0.91021 38.0 0.45 0.92107 0.00258 0.92623 4.32 O.50 0.91343 0.00304 0.91951 0.45 0.92110 0.00268 0.92646 4.60 35.0 0.50 0.92753 0.00261 0.93275 0.55 0.90706 0.00215 0.91136 0.40 0.88770 0.00275 0.89320 4.85 31.0 0.45 0.91343 0.00263 0.91869 0.50 0.90986 0.00250 0.91486 0.45 0.90807 0.00319 0.91445 5.00 30.0 0.50 0.91903 0.00285 0.92473 0.55 0.91677 0.00262 0.92201 i Neutron multiplication factors based on the fission particle flux method. O

August 31,1993 Page 26af 29 GEMER Results for an 9x7x4 Triangular Array of Damaged BU-7s t Table 17B. (Limiting UO2 Masses and Enrichments with 5.7 "t/o Ilydrocarbon) UO Mass WF H O kerr a keg + 20 Enrichment 2 2 (*/o) (kg) 0.30 0.89736 0.00236 0.90208 2.86 70.0 0.35 0.90688 0.00263 0.91214 ) 0.39* 0.90729 0.00233 0.91195 0.35 0.90905 0.00229 0.91363 3.06 65.0 0.40 0.91910 0.00198 0.92306 0.413 0.91730 0.00229 0.92188 0.35 0.90570 0.00237 0.91044 3.50 50.0 0.40 0.90730 0.00258 0.91246 0.45 0.90670 0.00204 0.91078 0.40 0.91606 0.00210 0.92026 4.10 40.0 0.45 0.92236 0.00251 0.92738 h 0.50 0.91338 0.00262 0.91862 0.40 0.91861 0.00256 0.92373 4.32 ' 38.0 0.45 0.92528 0.00280 0.93088 0.50 0.91975 0.00227 0.92429 0.45 0.92288 0.00240 0.92768 4.60 35.0 0.50 0.92943 0.00233 0.93409 0.55 0.91954 0.00219 0.92392 0.45 0.92049 0.00271 0.92591 4.85 31.0 0.50 0.92244 0.00232 0.92708 0.55 0.91377 0.00229 0.91835 0.40 0.91276 0.00300 0.91876 5.00 30.0 0.45 0.92909 0.00281 0.93471 0.50 0.92741 0.00268 0.93277 i Neutron multiplication factors based on the fission particle flux method. J ' and water mixture is within 2 cm of the inside rim of the $ Full container (i.e., the UO3 BU-7). Increasing the weight fraction of water in the mixture results in reduced UO mass for the h; 2 calculation.

August 31,1993 Page 27of 29 t GEMER Results for a Triangular Array of Darnaged HU-7s Table 18. 30.0 kg U(5.00)O and 50.0 "'/o II 0 2 2 WFInterspersedH O keg a keg + 20 2 0.00 0.91903 0.00285 0.92473 0.05 0.90388 0.00273 0.90934 0.10 0.89402 0.00268 0.89938 0.20 0.88813 0.00262 0.89337 0.30 0.88571 0.00286 0.89143 0.40 0.87536 0.00283 0.88102 0.60 0.87309 0.00259 0.87827 0.80 0.88205 0.00263 0.88731 1.00 0.87909 0.00232 0.88373 t Neutron tr;ultiplication factors based on the fission particle flux method. D. Presence of Plastic Bags or Other Moderating Materials Around the UO (or UO2 2 Containers) O lt is sometimes desirable to ship UO enclosed in plastic bags in the BU-7 container. The 2 bags may be around the fuel either inside or outside of the three or five gallon pails. For the BU-7 container with the contents and assumptions described in the previous sections of this repon and the safety analysis of Reference 6. the presence of these bags is acceptable. The demonstration of this is given in Reference 6 for the case of 5.0% enriched material. Since the 5.0% enrichment case is still the limiting (most reactive) of the accident arrays, the justification given in that report is unaltered by the present analysis. The limit of 0.05 weight fraction or 1.750 grams mass of moderator, whichever is smaller. is accounted for in the current analysis by (1) considering optimum moderation in the single container and accident array cases and (2) including 5 *% water in the normal condition cases. O

August 31,1993 Page 280f29 h IV.

SUMMARY

AND CONCLUSION This analysis has demonstrated that the BU-7 shipping container meets the requirements of 10CFR71.55 and 57 for a Fissile Class I package with contents specified as follows: Tyne and Form The BU-7 may contain uranium dioxide powder enriched to not more than 5.0 *% in the U-235 isotope with the maximum H/U atomic ratio not exceeding 1.6. Ammoniumoxalate and/or ammonium bicarbonate additives are permitted in the UO powder to the extent that C/U ratio does 2 not exceed 1.27. The mass of moderating materials within the inner container when added to the total mass of moderator within the fuel shall not exceed 1,750 grams or 5.0% of the mass, whichever is smaller. Maximum Ouantity ner Packaee The bounds for the three sigma enrichment limits are presented below along with the corresponding nominal enrichments. The maximum contents per package shall be as specified tmlow (Table 19). UO Mass Limits Versus Enrichment Table 19. 2 Maximum UO Mass leading Nominal Enrichment Maximum Possible 2 (%) Enrichment (%) (kg) 2.80 2.86 70.0 3.00 3.06 65.0 3.44 3.50 50.0 4.00 4.10 40.0 4.25 4.32 38.0 4.50 4.60 35.0 4.75 4.85 31.0 5.00 5.00 30.0 0

August 31,1993 Page 290f 29 O

v. aerrassces 1.

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission " Certificate of Compliance for Radioactive Materials Packages," Certificate Number 9019, Revision 18. i

2. " Packaging and Transportation of Radioactive Material" United States Nuclear 7

Regulatory Commission Rules and Regulations, Title 10, Chapter 1, Part 71, Code of - Federal Regulations,11/30/88.

3. " Test Report for Model BU-7 Bulk Uranium Shipping Container," 4/25/80.

4. " Criticality Analysis of BU-7 Container for Theoretical Density Pellets," 1/24/86. 5. " Criticality Safety Analysis of BU-7 Shipping Container for UO Powder," 3/6/80. 2

6. " Criticality Safety Analysis for BU-7 Shipping Container for 4.0% to 5.0% Enriched UO Powder with Failure of Containment and Moderation Contml," 6/1/92.

2 7. "The General Electric Model BU-7 Uranium Shipping Container - Criticality Safety Analysis," 2R4. 8. GEMER/ MONTE CARLO, User's Manual,9/15/81. O e 4 h O

e k APPENDIX D POWDER BASED REQUEST FOR APPROVAL TO SHIP UO2 UPON 7x9x4 TRIANGULAR PITCHED ARRAY, FULLY MODERATED IdJD WATER REFLECTED, WITH NO CREDIT TAKEN FOR BORON. LETTER FROM CM VAUGHAN TO CE MACDONALD, JUNE 14, 1993 1 LICENSE SNM-1097 DATE 09/14/93 PAGE DOCKET 71-9019 REVISION O D i

m, ^b i June 14, 1993 Mr. Charles E. MacDonald, Chief Transportation Certification Branch Division of Fuel Cycle & Material Safety U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555

Subject:

Request for Approval to Ship

References:

(1) NRC Certificate of Compliance USA /9019/AF, Model BU-7 Shipping Package, Docket 71-9019 (2) Confirmative Action Letter, CE MacDonald to CM Vaughan, 6/10/93 () General Electric Company's Nuclear Fuel and Components Manufacturing (NF&CM) facility hereby requests that the referenced Confirmative Action Letter (CAL) be modified to allow shipment of UO in the BU-7 by NF&CM in accordance with the information 2 provided with this letter. In the CAL, you stated that our request for approval should include the type and form of material, the maximum quantity of material per package, the amount of boron present and the criticality safety analysis for a damaged array. contains a summary of the results of our criticality analysis for the accident condition arrays. This is based on a 7X9X4 trihngular pitched array, fully moderated and water reflected. No credit.is taken for boron. The other constituents of the foam are considered as being present at a foam density of 7 lbs, per cubic foot. The calculated maximum mass limits for UO corresponding to the maximum enrichments are also provided. 2 is a diagram of the accident condition array. . Based upon our analyses, we request permission to ship UO2 powder .in accordance with the conditions and the limits provided in the attachments to this letter.

e P' -Mr. Charles E. MacDonald June 14, 1993 Page 2 If you have any questions or would like to discuss this matter further, please contact me. Sincerely, GE NUCLEAR ENERGY (44 3 4 ' dW U" Charles M. Vaughan, Manager Regulatory Compliance f /zb attachments cc: CMV-93-O'.9 O "r-ste~ert o se=eter NRC-Region II Mr. George Brown DOT-Washington, DC -l 0 p O b

Mr. Charles E. MacDonald June 14, 1993 O K + 20*, VALUES FOR i ACCIDENT CONDITION ARRAYS

• l l

MAX. UO 3 POWDER WITR H O s - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2 E PER BU7 MAX. (KG) .35 .40 .45 .50 .55 .60 .65 2.85 46 .9307 .9348 .9235 3.06 42 .9317 .9326 .9358 .9163 3.50 33 .9248 .9354 .9281 .9023 i 4.10 27 .9341 .9344 .9305 4.31 25 .9227 .9374 .9293 .9141 (.9230)$ (.9372) (.9226) 4.60 23 .9204 .9372 .9349 .9216 i 4.85 21 .9240 .9322 .9265 5.00 20 .9001 .9272 .9248 .9273 .8982 i NOTES: 1 The maximum bias as established in the consolidated application (1/27/93) is ~ -0.012. The limit for the K + 20 values is 0.9380. Conditions - 7X9X4 arrays, triangular pitch, fully moderated, water reflected. 2 No credit taken for boron, the other constituents of foam are considered at a i density of 7 lbs. per cubic foot. The highest multiplication case (i.e.. E = 4.31% mass = 25 kg per BU-7) was 3 O regeeted using cathon which may be present in additives. Carbon was added in the form of HC which replaces part of the H O and has a density of.812 grams 2 per cubic centimeter. 'Ihc values (shown in parenthesis) show no significant change in multiplication.

O 2;;erer1e;g.Mecoeme1e c ATTACHMENT 2 X-Y PLOT O TRIAN PITCH CO o O o o o$ 8 8 o oo ooa a c

i O I s h [ APPENDIX E ) " CRITICALITY SAFETY ANALYSIS: BU-7 SHIPPING CONTAINER FOR UO PELLETS / POWDER WITH ENRICHMENTS 2 AT OR BELOW 4.10% WITH FAILURE OF CONTAINMENT AND MODERATION CONTROL", SEPTEMBER 9, 1993 O 1 l LICENSE SNM-1097 DATE 09/14/93 PAGE j DOCKET 71-9019 REVISION O E i

l O i Criticality Safety Analysis: BU-7 Shipping Container for UO Pellets / Powder with 2 Enrichments at or Below 4.10% with Failure of Containment and Moderation Control September 9,1993 i O t t d 8 7 O

a + c> -4LG I-d- 6 September 9,1993 Page 1 of 23 O Criticality Safety Analysis: BU-7 Shipping Container for UO2 Pellets / Powder with Enrichments at or Below 4.10% with Failure of Containment and Moderation Control I. INTRODUCTION Model BU-7 shipping containers are used by 'the General Electric Company for the transportation of low-enriched unirradiated uranium dioxide powder, pellets and scrap. The BU-7 235U enrichment of container is a Fissile Class I package which is currently licensed for a maximum 5.0% for powder and 4.0% for pellets and scrap. In the previous case for enrichments below 4.0%, the containers were restricted to two 5 gallon pails or three 3 gallon pails which are limited in contents to no more than 70 kg of UO2 Powder or two safe batches of UO pellets (or powder) per package. Each 2 package was also limited in the amount of hydrogenous moderation that may be present in the fuel. In a prior analysis for UO powder enriched in the range of 4.0% to 5.0%, the BU-7 container 2 was demonstrated to comply with Fissile Class I requirements for conditions in which the inner containment vessel does not prevent water flooding under the hypothetical accident conditions specified in 10CFR71.57. It was also considered in that analysis that the five or th'ree gallon. pails lose their integrity and that the UO2 Powder in each drum is mixed with the waterin the BU-7's inner containment vessel. Each container was restricted to UO mass limits as follows: 35.0 kg UO for enrichments 2 2 greater than 4.0% but no more than 4.25%,32.5 kg UO for enrichments greater than 4.25% but no more 2 than 4.50%,30.0 kg UO enrichments greater than 4.50% but no more than 4.7.5%, and 27.5 kg UO for O 2 2 enrichments greater than 4.75% but no more than 5.0%. The normal case restriction for the fuel contents to a H/U atomic ratio of 0.45 was applied, but the contents were limited so that the total mass of hydrogenous moderator in the inner containment vessel was no greater than 1000 grams or 3.6% of the weight of the uranium dioxide, whichever was smaller. In the present analysis for UO2 Pellets (and powder) enrichments below 4.10%, the BU-7 container is demonstrated to comply with Fissile Class I requirements for conditions in which the inner containment vessel does not prevent water flooding under the hypothetical accident conditions specified in 10CFR71.57. It is also considered in this analysis that the five or three gallon pails lose their integrity and that the UO2 Pellets / powder in each drum are mixed with the water in the BU-7's inner containment vessel. Each container is restricted to UO mass limits as follows: 30.0 kg UO for 2 2 enrichments greater than 3.06% but no more than 4.10%, and 50.0 kg UO for emichments at or below 2 3.06%. The normal case restriction of the fuel contents to a H/U atomic ratio of 1.6 still applies, but the 4 contents must be limited so that the total mass of hydrogenous moderatorin the inner containment vessel is no greater than 1750 grams or 5.0% of the weight of the uranium dioxide, whichever is smallcr. Specifications for the geometry and materials of construction of the BU-7 container,5 and 3 gallon pails are the same as those for the existing Certificate [11 with one exception. Alinercontaining a strong neutron absorbing material has been added to the inside drum, surrounding the pails of UO2 powder. The lineris made from "Boral," which is essentially a B C ~and Aluminum compound. The 4 liner is composed of 0.080 inches (minimum,0.085 nominal) of Boral, sandwiched between two sheets of 0.026 inch (minimum,0.030 nominal) stainless steel. The Boralliner has a minimum height of 26.0 0-inches and is designed to fit against the inner drum of the BU-7. The Boral material has a minimum W 2 density of B atoms per unit surface area of 0.011 g/cm,

r September 9,1993 Page 2 of 23 9 II. ANALYSIS A. BU-7 Container The BU-7 shipping container consists of a 55 gallon DOT Specification 17H outer drum constructed of 18-gauge steel. The outer drum contains 7 - 9 lbs/ft3 fire-retardant phenolic resin insulation sandwiched between it and a 13.75 to 14.05 inch diameter by nominal 27 inch long steelinner drum. The inner drum (also described as the " inner containment vessel"), has a gasket and is sealed with a bolted metal lid to insure water tightness, and normally holds two 5 gallon pails or three 3 gallon pails. A liner of Boralis included inside the inner containment vessel. Figure 1 depicts the container with a cutaway section showing the internal container and the phenolic resin. B. General Requirements for Fissile Class I Shipping Containers As specified in Parts 71.55 and 71.57 of Reference 2, the criticality safety requirements for a Fissile Class I shipping container are that suberiticality be maintained for the following: 1. Single Conta;=r; with the most reactive credible configuration of the package and contents, including moderadon by water, and assuming close reflection by water on all sides. 2. Infinite Arrays of Containers - undamaged, in any arrangement with optimum interspersed hydrogenous mode ration. g 3. Arrays of Damaged Containers - two hundred and fifty " damaged" containers stacked together in any arrangement, closely reflected on all sides by water and with optimum interspersed hydrogenous moderation. " Damaged" means in the condition resulting from being subjected to the " Hypothetical Accident Conditions" specified in Part 71.73 of the Rules and Regulations. The " Hypothetical Accident Conditions" tests were conducted for the BU-7 container in 1979-80 and are reported in Reference 3. The results of the tests showed that while deformation of the outer 55 gallon drum occurred at the points of contact, there was no evidence of punctures, fractures or separation of the container sides from the bottoms. No damage was found to the sealing features or the integrity of the inner container or the UO2 Pellet / powder pails inside it. After the fire and water immersion tests, the inner container remained dry, the silicone rubber gasket sealing it was undamaged, and no significant increase in the moisture content in the powder was found. The report concluded that in the tests, the outer container did not suffer any significant damage that would affect criticality safety considerations. Notwithstanding the results of these tests, the current analysis will take into consideration accident conditions in which water is assumed to enter the inner containment vessel and the UO2 powder, the three or five gallon pails spill out into the larger inner containment vessel and UO powder 2 mixes with the water. For simplicity in modelling. the three and/or five gallon pails will conservatively be omitted from the analysis and the water and UO pellets will be modelled solely in the inner 2 containment vessel. The phenolic resin will also be considered to absorb water and the same amount of g water analyzed outside of the container will be assumed to be present in the resin. This includes full T density water for water reflection of the single container.

September 9,1993 Page 3 of 23 Figure 1. IlU-7 Container i h' I !j!kg**5P!;n, 53 El i. 5 l I.,ie /m s

• i

'J a a 1 4'I l "!i 8 5 it s :r [v t ss i b: e 1:. r n i: <=il!a;!;i.p@ihil sfa ! - eb '" l y-! p;f:B l

• F:

i 9 i gr eg o as ed e [ l ! g s s l. N I l1&I[! i,lalillia allib! J i o g; Jai i,! !i I h ,l3 24 Ug 1-Jr i 2 !}! Jg_ m ! :33 113 ir i!"lt b !Iill!,lIl*! 3 re'il 5 L

= [e!!jr

i,

+1.l i-I _{ u a i e :

• I 3

l-4 t si !5k*

• e l2 S

l FI*!'I!!!!it! -Al I i E' is! rid jg. 61!! c.ar iGji m na S l

f! ! I..ei

,a t mi e m m .!s IEl r. ns e; i h-s: sp O ! is !! B.~i m ., s rx rp zu a a s Thf "I P .f

• E s :.)

-3 A g Erg; 1 d 2'r

• 02 SI a e r

i ll5!!_!!!v. h!!il $l f, !. 7k L ~ w s-3g 8, ,b '*8I U 8 M* Er 8 5 7" lE5l 3 3 " ** E* l/ lJ si !la! !l' ss / w 5 M rah = 7 li l'i ". 1 - f- - r

s.usz

/ \\O )*nl{s ' a f Y. ik $; Q f p,, if # f f M f M D B %/ i n r %q;p;,

• s

..... _. ~,., c 3 t // // /,- ]hg q! y // // g g 'sji .). u n = 's= ~ ~ d ,t u 3:= 4 1 nf I @ 3 :$ / / / m: gs he $1 \\ A' / 5 t ~ 1 s n \\ t: i pJ 23 = xa i if IJ e ~ II p!.! N!.!!! N! I$ [b 5 ~ 5 / n t;nk,ggd $EE 'Eg a w m.sg m t A s x ,,a T S E.N,f,I $E i ~~" et a s i o 3 o i i i i i

September 9,1993 Page 4 of 23 O C. UO Pellets and Water 2 Previous criticality safety analyses of the BU-7 container are documented in References 4,5,6 and 7. For the present analysis, the contents of the container are taken to be within the inner containment vessel (including liner) with uranium dioxide powder enriched up to 4.107c in U235, which is restricted in moderation to a H/U atomic ratio of 1.6. The fuelis modelled as UO and water and 2 therefore applies to all uranium dioxide powders having theoretical densities no greater than 10.96 3 g/cm. Atom densities for theoretical density UO2 used in this analysis are listed in Table Homogeneous mixtures of UO and water are less reactive than the heterogeneous case and so are 1. 2 bounded by this analysis where all the UO is in solid form. 2 Table 1. Atom Densities for Maximum Density UO Pellets 2 Enrich-NU235 NU238 No ment (7c) (atoms / barn-cm) (atoms / barn-cm) (atoms / barn-cm) 3.06 7.5740E-04 2.3691E-02 4.8897E-02 4.10 1.0148E -03 2.3437E-02 4.8903E-02 3 For full density water (OH2O = 1.00 g/cm ) Nu = 6.6743E-02 atoms / barn-cm and No = 3.3372E4)2 atoms / barn-cm. The water-to-fuel ratio may be varied through the geometry of the system (i.e., pellet array pitch, pellet diameter and/or total height of fuel in the container). The water-to-fuel volume ratio (W/F) may be determined from the volume of water surrounding the pellet (a function of the pitch) and the volume of the pellet itself. The water to-fuel ratio can be written W/F = (Pitch)2_3924 (Pitch)2 -I D2 a D2 (1) An average density of the materials may be calculated (although this is not explicitly used) for each of the water-to-fuel volume ratios. The total volume of fuel and water, as well as the height of the fuel and water in the container, can be determined from the average density value. The average density can be found from a mass balance (TH2O + TUO2) Gaw = TH2O OH2O + IUO2 OUO2 (2) In terms of the water-to-fuel ratio, equation (2) can be rearranged to give (W/F) en:o + 0U02 9""

• W/F + 1 (3)

Since the mass and average density of the system is known, the volume and corresponding dimensions of the problem can be determined. D. Staterials of Construction The major constituents of the BU-7 container are the carbon steel drums and phenolic 3 resin. Carbon steel has a density of 7.82 g/cm and its component atom densities are 3.921E--03 i l l (

September 9,1993 Page 5 of 23 O atoms / barn-cm for carbon and 8.3491E4)2 for iron. Stainless steel,if used for construction,is a better neutron absorber than is carbon steel. Thus, the analysis applies to BU-7 containers constructed of stainless steel as well as those constructed of carbon steel. 3 The density of phenolic resin compound with the minimum specification (i.e.,7 lbs/ft ) is given below (Table 2). One-hundred percent of the minimum specified phenolic resin density is used in this analysis, although no credit has been taken for boron which is present. Table 2. Phenolic Resh \\ tom Densities in the BU-7 Container Element Atom Density (Atom / barn-cm) Hydrogen 3.0140E4)3 Boron 10 0.0000E+00 Boron 11 0.0000E+00 Carbon 2.3050E-03 Oxygen 2.0510E-03 Silicon 5.2890E-05 Table 3 gives the constituent elements and associated atom densities for the Boral liner. Asan O added conservati m in the treatment erthe iiner. oaiv 75* er the minimum recified den 8ity is u ed in the analysis (e.g., only 75% of the B10 atoms are included in the liner for the analysis). Table 3. Boral Liner Atom Densities Element Atom Density (Atom / barn-cm) Carbon 3.0675E-03 Boron 10 2.4418E-03 Boron 11 9.8285E-03 Aluminum 4.5406E-02 E. Analytical Method Neutron multiplication factor calculations in this criticality analysis have been performed with the GEMER Monte Carlo code [8]. GEMER is a modified version of the Battelle Northwest Laboratory's B MC Monte Carlo code which has been combined with the geometry handling subroutines in KENO IV. Cross section sets in GEMER are processed from the ENDF/B-IV library in 190 broadgroup and resonance parameter formats except for thermal scattering in water which is represented by the Haywood Kernel in the ENDF/B library. In GEMER, the resonance parameters describe the cross sections in the resonance energy range and Monte Carlo sampling in this range is done from the resonance kernels rather than from the broad group cross sections. Thus,thereis a single, unique cross O section set a eciated -ith each avaitebie i orenc end devendence i eet viaced oe oancorr <riex shadowing) correction factors or effective scattering cross sections. The cross section library includes

September 9,1993 Page 6 of 23 O fi ssion, ca pt ure, elastic, inelastic, and (n,2n ) reac tion s. Absorption is implicitly treated by applying the non-absorption probability to neutron weights at each collision point. GEMER's bias has been detennined (from an extensive validation against critical experiments) to vary from +0.006 to 4).021 over the range of moderation in the fuel mixtures considered in this analysis. For under-moderated mixtures with H/U atomic ratios less than about 5, the bias is positive denoting that neutron multiplication factors are over-predicted. The bias then decreases almost linearly to 4).015 at an H/U ratio of about 25. These values span the range considered for the BU-7 container since the highest degree of moderation (that for the UO and H O mixture with a WFH2O of 2 2 0.40) corresponds to an H/U ratio of about 28. Since the bias is positive for H/U ratios less than 5, it can be ignored for the array calculations involving undamaged containers. For the calculations involving the single container and a damaged array of containers, a value of 4LO21 is conservative. F. Modelling of Geometry The geometry model used in this analysis of the BU-7 containeris illustrated in Figure 2 and the GEMER geometry input is tabulated in Tables 4 through 6. The BU-7 was modelled with the 35.40 cm diameter,70.2 cm high inner containment vessel filled with UO pellets and water to the appropriate 2 height. The pellet height in the inner container was determined by calculating the volume necessary to accommodate a given mass of pellets with a specified pitch and diameter. Since theinnercontainer and liner radii are fixed, this volume corresponds to some pellet array height. Note that due to a difference between the minimum liner height (26 inches or 66.04 cm) and the height of the inner containment vessel n (27.6 inches or 70.2 cm), a 4.16 cm gap exists. This gap in height is conservatively modelled by W aligning the liner against the top of the inner drum, so that the UO and water mixture is not surrounded 2 by boron in the bottom of the vessel. The UO pellets are modelled as columns (or rods of UO ) laying within the inner containment 2 2 vessel, oriented with their axes perpendicular to the axis of the BU-7. The orientation of the pellets makes no significant difference in multiplication; the pellets were modelled in this fashion to take full advantage of the geometry features available in the GEMER code. Note that the pellets are explicitly modelled. This is the key difference between the models of UO2 powder / water mixtures and pellets. The heterogeneous case modelled here will be shown to be more reactive. Due to heterogeneous effects, the most reactive pellet size (diameter) must be considered. The height is the total height of the water / fuel array of pellets in the inner containment vessel. This height is related to the average density of material and the total amount of UO in the containment 2 vessel. The height may be calculated as: c h,,,,, - h,,, gave (1 - wifrff2o) x rji,,, Mass (UO ) - 2 i ii vesset ^ Height =

• + h,,, - h n,,,

in eave (1 - wtfr f2a) a r, i vessel ~ The heights were determined by dividing the applicable UO mass (eg.,30.0 kg UO at 4.1% g 2 2 enrichment less the amount of mixture in the region which may not surrounded by the liner) by the pmduct of the average UO component density for the mixture and the inner containment vessel's base 2

September 9,1993 Page 7 of23 O. o area (equal to n x 17 70 cm ) as shown above. These heights are shown in Tables 4A-Cand 5A-C as i 2 2 referenced from the base of the inner containment vessel, whereas the model has as its reference the center of the BU-7 inner containment vessel (a constant difference of 35.1 cm). The Boral liner is modelled as having a minimum thickness and maximum outer radius (i.e., the liner is treated as if it were flush against the wall of the inner containment vessel). This treatment maximizes the outerradiusof the UO2 Pellet army. While this modelling tesults in the maximum mass of liner material in the BU-7, the effect of the maximizing the Boral mass is relatively small in comparison with the impact of the geometric buckling. Maximizing the radius of the liner is a conservative treatment in the calculations. For the case of Infinite Arrays of Normal Containers, the model in Figure 2 is placed into a triangular array and the array is spatially reflected on all six sides with varying amounts of interspersed waterin the phenolie resin (Regions 2, ll,13,23 and 27 in Table 4) and in the regions outside of the outer container. For the accident case of the Arrays of Damaged Containers, the array was modelled as an 9 x 7 x 4 triangular pitch array of BU-7 containers tightly reflected on all six sides by at least 30 cm of water. The 9 x 7 x 4 triangular array is the one having a minimum of at least 250 units (it has 252 units) whose dimension is closest to a cube and therefore which has the minimum geometrical buckling (maximum neutron multiplication). Each BU-7 was modelled as in Figure 2 and the interspersed water was again added to the phenolic resin insulation (Regions 2,11,13,23 and 27 in Table 5). For the Single Container case, the BU-7's outer 55 gallon drum is tightly reflected on all 6 sides by at least 30 cm of full density water and water was assumed to leak into the inner containment vessel to the extent of optimum moderation within the container. Full density wateris also added to the phenolic resin (Regions 2,11,13,23 and 27 in Table 6) and in the regions outside of the outer container. 1 0

' September 9,1993 7 Page 8 of23 [ Gi 17.70 28.57 z 5 P 45.3692 - - - - - -

---

r-~~------------------

- - - - - Interspersed Water 1 44.4167 - - - - - - Carbon Steel 44.308 - - - - - - Phenolic Resin l 36.688 - - - - - - InterspersedWater l C a 3 5.5763 - - - - - - 35.10 - - - - - - r b o e n 3 Boral Liner s t e f as sss..aassu sa, JJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJ, J J J. J J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J J. J. J. J, jj j, as Heterogeneous s, J J * * * * *2 + H2O region J, JJ UO ********J- -30.94- - - - - - - J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J to. J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J 'J, -35.10 - - - - - - gg,n steci -35.2087 - - - - - - l Phenolic Resin -42.8287 - - - - - - -42'9374 - - - - - - Carbon Steel - Interspersed Water l 4.8424 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -. - - * - - - - - - - -. - - - - - - - - - - O

17.808 23.495 28.684 17.363 Dimensions in cm.

O Figure 2 GEMER Geometry Model for BU-7 Container i

September 9,1993 Page 9 af 23 O Table 4 GEMER Geometry Model for Infinite Arrays of Containers -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 BOX TYPE 1 /* LOWER PORTION OF BU-7 1 CYLINDER 3 17.808 -35.10 -35.2087 16*0.5 2 CYLINDER 5 28.575 -35.10 -42.8287 16*0.5 3 CYLINDER 3 28.5755 -35.10 -42.9374 16*0.5 4 CYLINDER 2 28.576 -35.10 -44.8424 16*0.5 5 CYLINDER 3 28.684 -35.10 -44.8424 16*0.5 BOX TYPE 2 /* SINGLE BU-7 6 CUBOID 4 59.2 -59.2 59.2 -59.2 75.85 -75.33 16*0.5 BOX TYPE 3 /* UPPER PORTION OF BU-7 7 CYLINDER 4 17.364 35.10 height 16*0.5 8 CYLINDER 3 17.429 35.10 height 16*0.5 9 CYLINDER 6 17.632 35.10 height 16*0.5 10 CYLINDER 3 17.808 35.10 height 16*0.5 11 CYLINDER 5 23.495 35.5763 height 16*0.5 12 CYLINDER 2 23.4955 36.688 height 16*0.5 13 CYLINDER 5 28.575 44.308 height 16*0.5 14 CYLINDER 3 28.5755 44.4167 height 16*0.5 15 CYLINDER 2 28.576 45.3692 height 16*0.5 16 CYLINDER 3 28,684 45.3692 height 16*0.5 BOX TYPE 4 /* FUEL CYLINDER CELL-WATER-TO-FUEL = 12.00 17 YCYLINDER 1 0.0952 17.70 -17.70 16*0.5 18 CUBOID 4 0.3040 -0.3040 17.70 -17.70 0.3040 -0.3040 16*0.5 (f BOX TYPE 5 /* INTERMEDIATE DISK OF FUEL CYLINDERS 19 CYLINDER 4 17.364 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 20 CYLINDER 3 17.429 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 21 CYLINDER 6 17.632 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 22 CYLINDER 3 17.808 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 23 CYLINDER 5 28.575 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 24 CYLINDER 3 28.684 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 BOX TYPE 6 /* INTERMEDIATE DISK OF FUEL CYLINDERS-BOTTOM, NO BORAL 25 CYLINDER 4 17.700 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 26 CYLINDER 3 17.808 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 l' 27 CYLINDER 5 28.575 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 28 CYLINDER 3 28.684 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 BOX TYPE 7 /* PROBLEM BOX FOR TRIANGULAR ARRAY - ONE LAYER DEEP i 29 CUBOID 2 215.15 -215.15 227.7 -227.7 45.3692 -44.8424 16*0.5 30 CORE O 215.15 -215.15 227.7 -227.7 45.3692 -44.8424 16*0.5 7 1 11 1 11 1 11 1 BEGIN COMPLEX /* PLACE PINS INTO FLAT DISK COMPLEX 5 4 -17.70 0.0 0.3040 59 1 1 0.6080 0.0 0.0 /* WITH LINER COMPLEX 6 4 -17.70 0.0 0.3040 59 1 1 0.6080 0.0 0.0 /* NO LINER /* PLACE BOTTOM, DISKS AND TOP PORTIONS INTO BU-7 COMPLEX 2 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 11 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 COMPLEX 2 6 0.0 0.0 -35.10 1 17 0.0 0.0 0.6081 /* NO LINER COMPLEX 2 5 0.0 0.0 -30.8433 1 1 34 0.0 0.0 0.6081 /* WITH LINER COMPLEX 2 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 1 1 1 0.0 0.0 0.0

September 9,1993 Page 10 of 23 O Table 4 (cont'd) GENIER Geometry Model for Infinite Arrays of { l i Containers j I l /* PLACE BU-7S INTO PROBLEM BOX ONE HALF AT A TIME { COMPLEX 7 2 -186.465 -199.015 0.0 7 51 57.37 99.50 0.0 j l COMPLEX 7 2 -157.78 -149.266 0.0 7 4 1 57.37 99.50 0.0 l UO + H2O l Materials: 1 2 2 Interspersed Water 1 3 Carbon Steel 4 Water Reflector (Full Density Water) 5 Phenolic Resin (Minimum Density) and Interspersed Water 6 Boral(75% Boron density) l Note: Region Numbers 1 through 30 noted on the left are for information only and are not part of geometry input. l Nx, Nzl, Nz2 are integers such that Nx 2 2x17.70/ pitch; Nzl=(hmnechtmer)/ pitch; Nz2 = (remaining height)/ pitch l

• Determined from height of fuel mixture. See Tables 7A-C and 8A-C.

9 l l l l 0

September 9,1993 Page H of23 - O Table 5 GEMER Geometry Model for 9

• 7
• 4 Triangular Accident Array of Containers BOX TYPE 1 /* LOWER PORTION OF BU-7 1

CYLINDER 3 17.808 -35.10 -35.2007 16*0.5 2 CYLINDER 5 28.575 -35.10 -42.8287 16*0.5 3 CYLINDER 3 28.5755 -35.10 -42.9374 16*0.5 4 CYLINDER 2 28.576 -35.10 -44.8424 16*0.5 5 CYLINDER 3 28.684 -35.10 -44.8424 16*0.5 BOX TYPE 2 /* SINGLE BU-7 6 CUBOID 4 59.2 ~59.2 59.2 -59.2 75.85 -75.33 16*0.5 BOX TYPE 3 /* UPPER PORTION OF BU-7 7 CYLINDER 4 17.364 35.10 height 16*0.5 8 CYLINDER 3 17.429 35.10 height 16*0.5 9 CYLINDER 6 17.632 35.10 height 16*0.5 10 CYLINDER 3 17.808 35.10 height 16*0.5 11 CYLINDER 5 23.495 35.5763 height 16*0.5 12 CYLINDER 2 23.4955 36.688 height 16*0.5 13 CYLINDER 5 28.575 44.308 height 16*0.5 14 CYLINDER 3 28.5755 44.4167 height 16*0.5 15 CYLINDER 2 28.576 45.3692 height 16*0.5 16 CYLINDER 3 28.684 45.3692 height 16*0.5 BOX TYPE 4 /* FUEL CYLINDER CELL-WATER-TO-FUEL = 12.00 0 17 YCYLINDER 1 0.0952 17.70 -17.70 16*0.5 18 CUBOID 4 0.3040 -0.3040 17.70 -17.70 0.3040 -0.3040 16*0.5 BOX TYPE 5 /* INTERMEDIATE DISK OF FUEL CYLINDERS 19 CYLINDER 4 17.364 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 20 CYLINDER 3 17.429 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 21 CYLINDER 6 17.632 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 22 CYLINDER 3 17.808 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 23 CYLINDER 5 28.575 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 24 CYLINDER 3 28.684 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 BOX TYPE 6 /* INTERMEDIATE DISK OF FUEL CYLINDERS-BOTTOM, NO BORAL 25 CYLINDER 4 17.700 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 26 CYLINDER 3 17.808 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 27 CYLINDER 5 28.575 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 28 CYLINDER 3 28.684 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 BOX TYPE 7 /* PROBLEM BOX FOR TRIANGULAR ARRAY - ONE LAYER DEEP 29 CUBOID 2 215.15 -215.15 227.7 -227.7 45.3692 -44.8424 16*0.5 30 CORE O 215.15 -215.15 227.7 -227.7 181.4768 -179.3696 16*0.5 31 CUBOID 4 246.15 -246.15 258.7 -258.7 212.4768 ~210.3696 16*0.5 7 111 1 11 1 1 1 1 BEGIN COMPLEX /* PLACE PINS INTO FLAT DISK COMPLEX 5 4 -17.70 0.0 0.3040 59 1 1 0.6080 0.0 0.0 /* WITH LINER COMPLEX 6 4 -17.70 0.0 0.3040 59 1 1 0.6080 0.0 0.0 /* NO LINER /* PLACE BOTTOM, DISKS AND TOP PORTIONS INTO BU-7 COMPLEX 2 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 11 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 COMPLEX 2 6 0.0 0.0 -35.10 117 0.0 0.0 0.6081 /* NO LINER COMPLEX 2 5 0.0 0.0 -30.8433 1 1 34 0.0 0.0 0.6081 /* WITH LINER O COMPLEX 2 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 1 11 0.0 0.0 0.0 l

September 9,1993 Page 12 of 23 O Table 5 (cont'd) GEMER Geometry Model for 9

• 7
• 4 Triangular Accident Arrays of Containers

/* PLACE BU-7S INTO PROBLEM BOX ONE HALF AT A TIME COMPLEX 7 2 -186.465 -199.015 0.0 7 51 57.37 99.50 0.0 COMPLEX 7 2 -157.78 -149.266 0.0 7 41 57.37 99.50 0.0 UO + H2O Materials: 1 2 2 Interspersed Water 3 Cartxm Steel 4 Water Reflector (Full Density Water) 5 Phenolic Resin (Minimum Density) and Interspersed Water 6 Boral (75% Boron density) Note: Region Numbers I through 31 noted on the left are for information only and are not part of geometry input. Nx, Nzl, Nz2 are integers such thac Nx 2-2x17.70/ pitch; Nzl=(hmner-h mer)/ pitch; Nz2 = (remaining height)/ pitch t

• Determined from height of fuel mixture. See Tables 7A-C and 8A-C.

l e l I e

i September 9,1993 Page 13 of 23 O Table 6 GEMER Geometry Model for Single Container BOX TYPE 1 /* LOWER PORTION OF BU-7 1 CYLINDER 3 17.808 -35.10 -35.2087 16*0.5 2 CYLINDER 5 28.575 -35.10 -42.8287 16*0.5 3 CYLINDER 3 28.5755 -35.10 -42.9374 16*0.5 4 CYLINDER 2 28.576 -35.10 -44.8424 16*0.5 5 CYLINDER 3 28.684. -35.10 -44.8424 16*0.5 BOX TYPE 2 /* SINGLE BU-7 6 CUBOID 4 59.2 -59.2 59.2 -59.2 75.85 -75.33 16*0.5 BOX TYPE 3 /* UPPER PORTION OF BU-7 7 CYLINDER 4 17.364 35.10 height 16*0 5 8 CYLINDER 3 17.429 35.10 height 16*0.5 9 CYLINDER 6 17.632 35.10 height 16*0.5 10 CYLINDER 3 17.808 35.10 height 16*0.5 11 CYLINDER 5 23.495 35.5763 height 16*0.5 12 CYLINDER 2 23.4955 36.688 height 16*0.5 13 CYLINDER 5 28.575 44.308 height 16*0.5 14 CYLINDER 3 28.5755 44.4167 height 16*0.5 15 CYLINDER 2 28.576 45.3692 height 16*0.5 16 CYLINDER 3 28.684 45.3692 height 16*0.5 BOX TYPE 4 /* FUEL CYLINDER CELL-WATER-TO-FUEL = 12.00 17 YCYLINDER 1 0.0952 17.70 -17.70 16*0.5 18 CUBOID 4 0.3040 -0.3040 17.70 -17.70 0.3040 -0.3040 16*0.5 BOX TYPE 5 /* INTERMEDIATE DISK OF FUEL CYLINDERS 19 CYLINDER 4 17.364 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 O 20 CYLINDER 3 17.429 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 21 CYLINDER 6 17.632 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 22 CYLINDER 3 17.808 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 23 CYLINDER 5 28.575 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 24 CYLINDER 3 28.684 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 BOX TYPE 6 /* INTERMEDIATE DISK OF FUEL CYLINDERS-BOTTOM, NO BORAL 25 CYLINDER 4 17.700 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 26 CYLINDER 3 17.808 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 27 CYLINDER 5 28.575 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 28 CYLINDER 3 28.684 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 2 11 1 111 111 1 BEGIN COMPLEX /* PLACE PINS INTO FLAT DISK COMPLEX 5 4 -17.70 0.0 0.3040 NX 1 1 pitch 0.0 0.0 /* WITH LINER COMPLEX 6 4 -17.70 0.0 0.3040 NX 1 1 pitch 0.0 0.0 /* NO LINER /* PLACE BOTTOM, DISKS AND TOP PORTIONS INTO BU-7 COMPLEX 2 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 1 1 1 0.0 0.0 00 COMPLEX 2 6 0.0 0.0 -35.10 1 1 NZ1 0.0 0.0 pitch /* NO LINER COMPLEX 2 5 0.0 0.0 -30.8433 1 1 NZ2 0.0 0.0 pitch /* WITH LINER COMPLEX 2 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 11 1 0.0 0.0

0.0 Materials

1 UO + H O 2 2 2 Interspersed Water 3 Carbon Steel 4 Water Reflector (Full Density Water) 5 Phenolic Resin (Minimum Density) and Full Density Water 6 Boral(75% Baron density) Note: Region Numbers I through 28 noted on the left are for information only and are not part of geometry input. O Nx, Nzl. Nz2 are integers such that: Nx 2: 2x17.70/ pitch: Nzl=(h nner-hune,)/ pitch; Nz2 = (remaining height)/ pitch i

• Determined from height of fuel mixture. See Tables 7A-C and 8A-C.

September 9,1993 Page 14 of 23 O Table 7A. Fuel / Water IIeights and Pitches for 30.0 kg Theoretical Density UO2 Particles Surrounded by WTOF II 0 2 Mass: 30 kg Pellet Radius: 0.0635 cm WTOF WTFR pitch height 1 0.08 0.1590 5.612 2 0.15 0.1940 8.503 3 0.21 0.2250 11.393 4 0.27 0.2510 14.283 5 0.31 0.2750 17.168 6 0.35 0.2970 20.056 7 0.39 0.3180 22.946 8 0.42 0.3370 25.839 9 0.45 0.3550 28.734 10 0.48 0.3730 31.616 11 0.50 0.3890 34.513 12 0.52 0.4050 37.397 13 0.54 0.4210 40.296 ggg 14 0.56 0.4350 43.181 Table 7B. Fuel / Water IIeights and Pitches for 30.0 kg Theoretical Density UO2 Particles Surrounded by WTOF II 0 2 Mass: 30 kg Pellet Radius: 0.09525 cm WTOF WTFR pitch height 1 0.08 0.2380 5.612 2 0.15 0.2920 8.499 3 0.21 0.3370 11.389 4 0.27 0.3770 14.273 5 0.31 0.4130 17.162 6 0.35 0.4460 20.056 7 0.39 0.4770 22.952 8 0.42 0.5060 25.832 9 0.45 0.5330 28.734 10 0.48 0.5590 31.616 11 0.50 0.5840 34.498 g 12 0.52 0.6080 37.404 13 0.54 0.6310 40.288 14 0.56 0.6530 43.172

i September 9,1993 Page 15 0f 23 O-Table 7C. Fuel / Water lleights and Pitches for 30.0 kg Theoretical Density UO2 Particles Surrounded by WTOF II 0 ] 2 l Mass: 30 kg Pellet Radius: 0.127 cm WTOF WTFR pitch height 1 0.08 0.3180 5.606 2 0.15 0.3890 8.503 ^ 3 0.21 0.4500 11.384 l 4 0.27 0.5030 14.273 l 5 0.31 0.5510 17.168 6 0.35 0.5950 20.067 7 0.39 0.6360 22.946 8 0.42 0.6750 25.826 I I 9 0.45 0.7110 28 734 10 0.48 0.7460 31.616 11 0.50 0.7790 34.498 12 0.52 0.8110 37.380 13 0.54 0.8420 40.296 14 0.56 0.8710 43.181 O l Table 8A. Fuel / Water IIcights and Pitches for 50.0 kg Theoretical Density UO2 l Particles Surrounded by WTOF II 0 2 Mass: 50 kg Pellet Radius: 0.09525 cm WTOF WTFR pitch height (cm) (cm) 1 0.08 0.2380 9.466 2 0.15 0.2920 14.279 3 0.21 0.3370 19.096 4 0.27 0 3770 23.907 5 0.31 0.4130 28.723 6 0.35 0.4460 33.543 7 0.39 0.4770 38.366 8 0.42 0.5060 43.173 9 0.45 0.5330 48.001 10 0.48 0.5590 52.810 J 11 0.50 0.5840 57.619 12 0.52 0.6080 62.452 () 13 0.54 0.6310 67.262 14 0.56 0.6530 72.073 l i .)

i i Septim her 9,1993 Page 16 cf23 ~ Table 88. Fuel / Water Ileights and Pitches for 50.0 kg Theoretical Density UO2 Particles Surrounded by WTOF 1I 0 2 Mass: 50 kg Pellet Radius: 0.127 cm WTOF WTFR pitch height (cm) (cm) j 1 0.08 0.3180 9.459 I 2 0.15 0.3890 14.283-3 0.21 0.4500 19.091 4 0.27 0.5030 23.907 5 0.31 0.5510 28.728 6 0.35 0.5950 33.554 l l 7 0.39 0.6360 38.360 8 0.42 0.6750 .43.166 9 0.45 0.7110 48.001 i 10 0.48 0.7460 52.810 11 0 50 0.7790 57.619. l 12 0.52 0.8110 62.428 l .ggg 13 0.54 0.8420 67.270 14 0.56 0.8710 72.082 Table 8C. Fuel / Water IIcights and Pitches for 50.0 kg Theoretical Density UO2 Particles Surrounded by WTOF H O 2 i Mass: 50 kg Pellet Radius: 0.15875 cm WTOF WTFR pitch height j (cm) -(cm) 1 0.08 0.3970 9.462 { 2 0.15 0.4870 14.279 3 0.21 0.5620 19.091 4 0.27 .0.6290 23.912 5 0.31 0.6890 28.712 l 6 0.35 0.7440 33.543 7 0.39 0.7950 38.348 8 0.42 0.8440 43.186 I 9 0.45 0.8890 47.994 10 0.48-0.9330 52.802 11 0.50 0.9740 57.611 13 0.54 1.0520 67.270. .g l '12 0.52 1.0140 62.420 4 14 0.56 1.0890 72 082 e re--

September 9,1993 Page 17 of 23 O III. CRITICALITY SAFETY ANALYSIS RESULTS The following sections summarize the results of the GEMER calculations perfonned for the fuel mixtures and geometry models described in Section II. The resuhs are all suberitical with the most limiting case being the accident condition array with zero interspersed water. A. Triangular Array of Damaged Containers As noted previously, the most reactive condition for the Fissile Class 1 BU-7 container assuming failure of containment by the product pails (either 3 or 5 gallon cans) and loss of moderation control, is the 9 x 7 x 4 triangular pitch array of damaged containers. This is shown by the calculations summarizedin the following tables. Note that in Tables 9A and 10A the results are complete in that the values are given as a function of water-to-fuel ratio and pellet diameter. The maximum keg + 20 for each case is highlighted in boldface. This format verifies that the case for optimum moderation is shown and indicates consistency with other results within the analysis and with prior analyses. Earlier analyses have demonstrated that the optimum amount of interspersed water for the accident case is 0.0, just as it is for the array of undamaged containers. This is an indication that components in the Boralliner, phenolic resin and steel are more effective as absorbers when the neutrons are slowed down outside of the container as long as some moderator exists in the vicinity of the liner. Tables 9B and 10B support this assertion; here the weight fraction ofinterspersed moderator has been varied. Since the maximum ken + 20 value is less than 0.9290 (the limit of subcriticality including the calculational bias), the BU-7 with the specified masses and enrichments U(E)O2 Percontainer(and with the assumptions of loss of containment and failure of moderation control) meets the applicable requirements for a Fissile Class I package. 1 i O 1 l

September 9,1993 Page 18 of 23 O i Table 9A. GEN 1ER Results for an 9x7x4 Triangular Array of Damaged EU-7s 50 kg U(3.06)O Pellets 2 W/F Pellet Dia. (in) kerf a kerr + 20 0.075 0.8766 0.0026 0.8818 5 0.l(X) 0.8748 0.0028 0.8804 0.125 0.8716 0.0030 0.8776 0.075 0.8900 0.0027 0.8954 7 0.100 0.8923 0.0024 0.8971 0.125 0.8901 0.0026 0.8954 0.075 0.8825 0.0028 0.8381 9 0.100 0.8781 0.0024 0.8829 0.125 0.8781 0.0025 0.8831 t Table 91L GENIER Results for a Triangular Array of Damaged BU-7s 50.0 kg U(3.06)O Pellets (100 mil Diameter) W/F = 7 2 ~ WFInterspersed H O kerr a kerr + 20 2 0.00 0.8923 0.0024 0.8971 0.05 0.8794 0.0025 0.8844 0.10 0.8682 0.0025 0.8732 0.25 0.8580 0.0024 0.8628 0.50 0.8440 0.0025 0.8490 0.75 0.8470 0.0029 0.8528 1.00 0.8491 0.0029 0.8549 i Neutron multiplication factors based on the fission particle flux method. O

September 9,1993 Page 19 of 23 O i Table 10A. GEMER Results for an 9x7x4 Triangular Array of Damaged BU-7s 30 kg U(4.10)O Pellets + 2 W/F Pellet Dia. (in) kert a kerr + 20 0.050 0.8697 0.0529 0.8755 8 0.075 0.8722 0.0028 0.8778 0.100 0.8720 0.0029 0.8779 0.050 0.8762 0.0027 0.8816 10 0.075 0.8763 0.0027 0.8817 0.100 0.8696 0.0025 0.8747 0.050 0.8765 0.0026 0.8817 12 0.075 0.8696 0.0023 0.87412 0.100 0.8657 0.0028 0.8713 i Table 10B. GEMER Results for a Triangular Array of Damaged BU-7s 30.0 kg U(4.10)O Pellets (75 mil Diameter) W/F = 10 2 WF1nterspersed H O k rr io kerr + 20 2 e 0 0.00 0.8763 0.0027 0.8817 0.05 0.8693 0.0028 0.8749 0.10 0.8584 0.0028 0.8640 0.25 0.8481 0.0026 0.8533 0.50 0.8484 0.0025 0.8534 0.75 0.8488 0.(X)27 0.8542 1.00 0.8481 0.0028 0.8537 i Neutron multiplication factors based on the fission particle flux method. B. Single Containers Tables 11 A and B show k-effective values for the single container cases at various water-to-fuel ratios. The most reactive pellet diameter from the accident array (found in Section Ill. A) is used for the single container analysis. The sets of tables correspond to the limiting mass / enrichment pairs j determined also from the accident array analysis. Allof the results are suberitical. The results for the largest k-effective value (corresponding to optimum moderation) again appear in boldface. Optimum moderation occurs at a slightly lower water-to-fuel ratio for each respective case than in the accident array. This is consistent since the single containeris practically a subset of the accident condition array with the exception that the single container is tightly reflected, therefore owering the amount ofinternal Q moderator required for optimum moderation. As expected. the magnitudes of k-effective for the single container cases are correspondingly lower than in the accident array.

September 9,1993 Page 20 of 23 O t Table ll A. GEMER Results for Single BU-7 Containers 50.0 kg U(3.06)O Pellets (100 mil Diameter) 2 W/F kerf a kerr + 20 5 0.8470 0.0026 0.8522 6 0.8546 0.0028 0.8602 7 0.8441 0.0025 0.8491 9 0.8226 0.0026 0.8278 t Table llB. GEMER Results for Single BU-7 Containers 30.0 kg U(4.10)O Pellets (75 mil Diameter) 2 W/F kerf a kerr + 20 7 0.8491 0.0029 0.8519 8 0.8514 0.0031 0.8576 9 0.8464 0.0028 0.8520 10 0.8458 0.0029 0.8516 11 0.8415 0.0025 0.8465 12 0.8353 0.0025 0.8403 i Neutron multiplication factors based on the fission particle flux method. C. Infinite Triangular Array of Undamaged Containers The analysis of the infinite anay of undamaged containers uses the optimum pellet diameter results obtained in Section Ill.A. For the 3.067c enriched case, the most reactive pellet diameter in the BU-7 configuration is 0.100" For the 4.1% enriched case, the most reactive pellet diameter in the BU-7 configuration is 0.075". The results are shown in Table 12A and B for both enrichments as a function of interspersed water density when the internal moderation is given by a water-to-fuel ratio of 1.0. As stated above, a water-to-fuel ratio of 1 is the equivalent of 8.6 wt% water for theoretical density UO. 2 The results in Table 12 show a maximum k m ofless than 0.65 for the infinite triangular array of(normal) BU-7 containers in both enrichment cases. This value. is much lower than the single container case l because the UO pellet configuration with only 8.4% water (WTOF=1)is significantly undermoderated. 2 Again, this is for the highly conservative and bounding case of 30 kg U(4.0'7c)O and a water-to-fuel 2 ratio of 1.0 rather than the amount of moderator to which the container is limited. Since the contents is limited to an H/U ratio of 0.45, which corresponds to a water content of 1.4 wt%, there is ample margin in the current analysis to allow additional moderators in the container, at least up to the extent that they do not exceed the amount which has been analyzed here. This allows for the stated values in the Introduction that "the contents must be limited so that the total mass of hydrogenous moderator in the g inner containment vessel is no greater than 100() grams or 3.6% of the weight of the uranium oxide, W j whichever is smaller" 4

} September 9,1993 Page 21 of 23 i Table 12A. GEMER Results for an Infinite Triangular Array ofIlU-7 Containers 50.0 kg U(3.06)O Pellets (100 mil Diameter) 2 WF Interspersed H O kerr a kerr + 20 1 2 0.00 0.6108 0.0028 0.6164 0.05 0.6241 0.0031 0.6303 0.10 0.6319 0.0027 0.6374 0.25 0.6223 0.0028 0.6279 0.50 0.6037 0.0028 0.6093 0.75 0.6022 0.0026 0.6074 l.00 0.6044 0.0030 0.6104 i Table 12B. GEMER Results for an Infinite Triangular Array of IlU-7 Containers 30.0 kg U(4.10)O Pellets (75 mit Diameter) 2 WFInterspersed H O kerr a kerr + 20 2 0.00 0.5217 0.0027 0.5271 r] 0.05 0.5445 0.0027 0.5499 0.10 0.5652 0.0031 0.5714 0.50 0.5556 0.0031 0.5619 1.00 0.5531 0.0032 0.5595 t Neutron multiplication factors based on the fission particle flux method. i 1 O

September 9,1993 Page 22 of 23 O D. Presence of Plastic llags or Other Moderating Materials Around the UO (or UO2 2 Containers) It is sometimes desirable to ship UO enclosed in plastic bags in the BU-7 container. The bags may be 2 around the fuel either inside or outside of the three or five gallon pails. For the BU-7 container with the contents and assumptions described in the previous sections of this report and the safety analysis of Reference 6, the presence of these bags is acceptable. The demonstration of this is given in Reference 6 for the case of 5.0'7e enriched material. Since the 5.0% enrichment case is still the limiting (most reactive) of the accident arrays, thejustification given in that report is unaltered by the present analysis. Also, since the contents of the BU-7 container with UO pellets has explicitly modeled heterogeneous 2 fuel regions, the geometry regions bordering the inner containment vessel are water regions. Since the water content is optimum for accident cases and highly conservative for undamaged arrays, any additional moderators such as the plastic bag, are already accounted for by the model as it has been constructed and analyzed. IV.

SUMMARY

AND CONCLUSION This analysis has demonstrated that the BU-7 shipping container meets the requirements of 10CFR71.55 and 57 for a Fissile Class I package with contents specified as follows: Type and Form Uranium oxide pellets / powder enriched to not more than 4.0 w/o in the U-235 isotope. The maximum $ H/U atomic ratio shall not exceed 0.45. The contents must be limited so that the total mass of hydrogenous moderator in the inner containment vessel is no greater than 1000 grams or 3.6% of the weight of the uranium oxide, whichever is smaller. Maximum Ouantity oer Package The bounds for the three sigma enrichment limits are presented below along with the corresponding nominal enrichments. The maximum contents per package shall be as specified below (Table 19). UO Pellet / Powder Mass Limits Versus Enrichment Table 11. 2 Maximum UO Mass Loading Nominal Enrichment Maximum Possible 2 (%) Enrichment (%) (kg) 3.00 3.06 50.0 4.00 4.10 30.0

September 9,1993 Page 23 of 23 O V. REFERENCES 1. U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission " Certificate of Compliance for Radioactive Materials Packages," Certificate Number 9019, Revision 18. 2. " Packaging and Transportation of Radioactive Material," United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Rules and Regulations, Title 10, Chapter 1, Part 71, Code of Federal Regulations, 11/30/88.

3. " Test Report for Model BU-7 Bulk Uranium Shipping Container," 4/25/80.

4. " Criticality Analysis of BU-7 Container for Theoretical Density Pellets," 1/24/86. 5. " Criticality Safety Analysis of BU-7 Shipping Container for UO Powder," 3/6/80. 2

6. " Criticality Safety Analysis for BU-7 Shipping Container for 4.0% to 5.0% Enriched UO Powder with Failure of Containment and Moderation Control," 6/1/92.

2 7. "The General Electric Model BU-7 Uranium Shipping Container - Criticality Safety Analysis," 2/74. 8. GEMER/ MONTE CARLO, User's Manual,9/15/81. 9. " Criticality Safety Analysis for BU-7 Shipping Container For Enrichments Below 5.0% UO Powder with Failure of Containment and Moderation Control",8/31/93. 2 O O

O 9 k APPENDIX F P " CRITICALITY SAFETY ANALYSES FOR BU-7 SHIPPING CONTAINER FOR URANIUM SCRAP WITH ENRICHMENTS AT OR BELOW 5.0% WITH FAILURE OF CONTAINMENT", SEPTEMBER 9, 1993 O 9 A t LICENSE SNM-1097 DATE 09/14/93 PAGE DOCKET 71-9019 REVISION O F -v-r

O Criticality Safety Analysis for BU-7 Shipping Container For Uranium Scrap with Enrichments at or Below 5.0% with Failure of Containment September 9,1993 O t t F p h O

September 9,1993 page I of 20 Criticality Safety Analysis: 11U-7 Shipping Container For Uranium Scrap with Enrichments at or llelow 5.0% with Failure of Containment and Moderation Control I. INTRODUCTION Model BU-7 shipping containers are used by the General Electric Company for the transportation oflow-enriched unirradiated uranium dioxide powder, pellets and scrap. The BU-7 235U enrichment of container is a Fissile Class I package which is currently licensed for a maximum 5.0% for powder and 4.025% for pellets and scrap. In the previous case for enrichments below 4.0%, the containers were restricted to two 5 gallon pails or three 3 gallon pails which are limited in contents to no more than 70 kg of UO2 Powder or two safe batches of UO2 Pellets (or powder) per package. Each package was also limited in the amount of hydrogenous moderation that may be present in the fuel. In a prior analysis for UO powder enriched in the range of 4.0% to 5.0%, the BU-7 coltainer 2 , as demonstrated to comply with Fissile Class I requirements for conditions in which the inner w containment vessel does not prevent water flooding under the hypothetical accident conditions specified in 10CFR71.57. It was also considered in that analysis that the five or three gallon pails lose theirintegrity and that the UO powder in each drum is mixed with the waterin the BU-7's inner 2 Each container was restricted to UO mass limits as follows: 35.0 kg UO for containment vessel. 2 2 Q enrichments greater than 4.0% but no more than 4.25%,32.5 kg UO for enrichments greater than 2 4.25% but no mon: than 4.50%,30.0 kg UO enrichments greater than 4.50% but no more than 2 4.75%, and 27.5 kg UO for enrichments greater than 4.75% but no more than 5.0%. The nonnal 2 case restriction for the fuel contents to a II/U atomic ratio of 0.45 was applied, but the contents were limited so that the total mass of hydrogenous moderator in the inner containment vessel was no greater than 1000 grams or 3.6% of the weight of the uranium dioxide, whichever was smaller. This analysis is perfonned to show the criticality safety of the BU-7 packages containing no more than 17.63 kgs of uranium in compounds no more dense than UO but with no specific limits on 2 235 moderation. It applies to U enrichments up to 5.0% and for any degree of moderation by water, carbon or either of their equivalents. Specifications for the geometry and materials of construction of the BU-7 container,5 and 3 gallon pails are the same as those for the existing Certificate [1] with one exception. A liner containing a strong neutron absorbing material has been added to the inside drum, surrounding the pails of UO powder. The liner is made from "Boral," which is essentially a layered B4C and 2 aluminum compound. The lir er is composed of 0.080 inches (minimum,0.085 nominal) of Boral, sandwiched between two sheets cf 0.026 inch (minimum,0.030 nominal) stainless steel. The Boral liner has a minimum heigh. of 26.0 inches and is designed to fit against the inner drum of the 10 B U-7. The Boral material has a minimum density'of B atoms per unit surface area 'of 2 0.011 g/cm, II. ANALYSIS Q A. IlU-7 Container The BU-7 shipping container consists of a 55 gallon DOT Specification 17H outer drum 3 constructed of 18-gauge steel which contains 7-9 lbs/ft fire-retardant phenolic resin insulation

September 9,1993 page 2 of 20 sandwiched between it and a 13.75 to 14.05 inch diameter by nominal 27 inch long 18-gauge steel inner drum. The inner drum (described as the "innner containment vessel"in the above paragraph), is gasketed and sealed with a bolted metal lid to insure water tightness, and nonnally holds two 5 gallon pails or three 3 gallon pails. A liner of Boralis included inside the inner containment vessel. Figure 1 depicts the container with a cutaway section showing the internal container, liner and the phenolic resin. B. General Requirements for Fissile Class I Shipping Containers As specified in Parts 71.55 and 71.57 of Reference 2, the criticality safety requirements for a Fissile Class I shipping container are that suberiticality be maintained for the following: 1. Single Containers - with the most reactive credible configuration of the package and contents, including moderation by water, and assuming close reflection by water on all sides. 2. Infinite Arrays of Containers - undamaged, in any arrangement with optimum interspersed hydrogenous moderation. 3. Arrays of Damaged Containers - two hundred and fifty " damaged" containers stacked together in any arrangement, closely reflected on all sides by water and with optimum interspersed hydrogenous moderation. " Damaged" means in the condition g resulting from being subjected to the" Hypothetical Accident Conditions" specified W in Part 71.73 of the Rules and Regulations. The " Hypothetical Accident Conditions" tests were conducted for the BU-7 container in 1979-80 and are reported in Reference 3. The basic results of the tests were that while deformation of the outer 55 gallon drum occurred at the points of contact, there was no evidence of punctures, fractures or separation of the container sides from the bottoms. No damage was found to the sealing features or the integrity of the inner container or the UO2 Powder pails inside it. After the fire and water immersion tests, the inner container remained dry, the silicone rubber gasket sealing it was undamaged, and no significant increase in the moisture coment in the powder was found. The report concluded that in the tests, the outer container did not suffer any significant damage that would affect criticality safety considerations. The current analysis will consider normal conditions in which wateris assumed to be present in the inner containment vessel to the extent of optimum moderation. The UO scrap in the three or 2 I five gallon pails is further assumed to spill out into the larger inner containment vessel and mix with the water. For simplicity in modelling, the three and/or five gallon pails will conservatively be omitted from the analysis and the water and UO2 scrap will be modelled solely in the inner containment vessel. The phenolic resin will also be considered to absorb water and the same amount of water analyzed outside of the container will be assumed to be present in the resin. This includes full density water for water reflection of the single container. Ol i i ~

September 9,1993 i page3of20 Figure 1. BU-7 Container II 1li &., i, i i

I 21 oi:;, ji,!

!.i 'o.o., e.;i ! ! !!;p; N. O

,3

.e i a af .i Dm .,.. I. a. , _....i :. :.. p.. i i i. ,3 a s I i l'f f n I" % s ti.h.. 1 N vi i "I ; i 4 g s i I el i ii! e f s a. h' I pde" i 1,1il ".8d ggiji.- ! DD i i p'i i pilliij!j[ij lia! ij J a i nj n _ gi h. Er fl i h. ~ d i a I: I.; 5 15 i ils li

=>

i eli.:,1 .,1*lIr.l,'I,se'i.l l is ./ I.l i i m {m 2 i 5 I;1 j 1 o jr airg;;j![.(is!_! 4 1 'g gr ! i if i!;f.Its !l 4 i !il*8 l' " i. -51 E:

11!!!

I I F m.. e I..!.lrigIu.g isi,5 .al. j 1 d r 3 5 ZI . i. 5 ! ':tf ~ e as'! n ~ ~ N$- O ll

v eg

- sn

- ~e .t rip i I e-I s:,3 Esil l@ s i e !!c b L ' ? I ij 14 I Jv / I!' i$v i! ngI It e a tyt EE i. il rE ytd* a *_ g s 8g g -~ 3 /_;'t{ .r!r !!1 H83 g-i ~ I g;! 3 5,,' 5 'a / I/ g e~f ss wkg Edi EE Tais 22 n l'll # d. 7 lI 3Y \\ "~j- ~ 7 c i8 ~18 15sEyl / \\o \\ i s j /s =i

.a

=p! k [hYbb khMM x !s i e;_i 7 7-3 // // /-y ~ ~ t.,

j

.afe; l i // // // l 2.,.'i syi} ou uu u e -- i;; / 5-- i l q" %j!.!! = l. I d .y / IEE % h ~ 51 ~ ~% a r 2 O / \\ b bI h ~ = ~ A e e5 j l ll / ,t e 18 // q 1

• m t

ji P.! s; p! IS:

1 n

i SI'tl Q N y;2 9 (x y~ j !.iEI i- !"n s. i x ai a a aE 2 ss,3

a a

ys 5 i e i o i ~ i i z

September 9,1993 page 4 of 20 0 C. UO Particles and Water Material Definitions 2 Previous criticality safety analyses of the BU-7 container are documented in References 4,5, 6 and 7. For the present analysis, the contents of the container is taken to be the inner containment vessel with uranium oxide in pellet form, which is more reactive than powder form. The uranium is 235 assumed to be enriched up to 5.0% in U. The fuelis modelled as heterogeneous UO2 surrounded by water and therefore applies to all uranium oxide pellets, powders and other sized solid forms 3 having densities no greater than 10.96 g/cm For the present analysis, the contents of the container is taken to be 17.63 kg of uranium (20.0 kg of UO ) in the form of cylindrical particles (similar to the pellet analysis of Reference 11), 2 enriched to 5.0% in 235U. Water is utilized as the moderating material since it is a more effective moderating material than carbon or any other hydrocarbon moderating material that might be present in the scrap. The fuel is modelled as 10.96 g/cc UO in water and therefore applies to all 2 uranium compunds (oxide, silicates, etc.) which might be present in GE BWR fuel manufacturing scrap. Atom densities for for theoretical density UO used in this analysis are listed in Table 1. 2 Homogeneous mixtures of UO and water are less reactive than the heterogeneous case and so are 2 bounded by the analysis where all the UO is in solid form. 2 O Table 1 Atom Densities for Theoretical Density UO Particles 2 Enrichment N235 N238 N16 atoms /b-cm atoms /b-cm atoms /b-cm 5.0% 1.23755E4)3 2.32165E4)2 4.89077E-02 For the analysis of particles, the particles are taken to be theoretical density UO (10.96 g/ce) 2 3 surrounded by full density water where OH2O = 1.00 g/cm Na = 6.6743E-02 atoms / barn-cm and No = 3.3372E4)2 atoms / barn-cm. Varying water-to-fuel ratios for the analysis are given by pitch of the particle array in the container, particle diameter and total height of the fuel in the container. D. Materials of Construction The major constituents of the BU-7 container are the carbon steel drums and phenolic resin. 3 Carbon steel has a density of 7.82 g/cm and its component atom densities are 3.921E-03 atoms /bam-cm for carbon and 8.3491E-02 for iron. Stainless steel, if used for construction in the future, is a better neutron absorber than is the carbon steel. Thus, the analysis applies to the BU-7 container constructed of stainless steel as well as those constructed of carbon steel. The density of phenolic resin compound with the minimum specification (i.e.,7 lbs/ft )is h 3 given below. One-hundred percent of the minimum specified phenolic resin density is used in this analysis, although no credit has been taken for boron which is present.

September 9,1993 page 5 of 20 0 Table 3. Phenolic Resin Atom Densities in the IlU-7 Container Element Atom Density (Atom / barn-cm) Hydrogen 3.0140E-03 Boron 10 0.0000E+.00 Boron 11 0.0000E+00 Carbon 2.3050E-03 Oxygen 2.0510E4)3 Silicon 5.2890E-05 i Table 4 gives the constituent elements and associated atom densities for the Boral liner. As an added conservatism in the treatment of the liner, only 75% of the minimum specified density is M used in the analysis (only 75% of the B atoms are included in the liner for the analysis). Table 4. Iloral Liner Atom Densities i Element Atom Density (Atom / barn-cm) Carbon 3.0675E4)3 O Boron 10 2.4418E-03 i Boron 11 9.8285E-03 Aluminum 4.5406E-02 E. Analytical Method Neutron multiplication factor calculations in this criticality analysis have been performed 8 with the GEMER Monte Carlo code. GEMER is a modified version of the Battelle Northwest Laboratory's BMC Monte Carlo code which has been combined with the geometry handling submutines in KENO IV. Cross section sets in GEMER are processed from the ENDF/B-IV library in 190 broadgroup and resonance parameter formats except for thermal scattering in water which is represented by the llaywood Kernel in the ENDF/B library. In GEMER, the resonance parameters describe the cross sections in the resonance energy range and Monte Carlo sampling in this range is done from the resonance kernels rather than from the broad group cross sections. There is thus, a single unique cross section set associated with each available isotope and dependence is not placed on Dancoff (flux shadowing) correction factors or effective scattering cross sections. The cross section library includes fission, capture, clastic, inelastic, and (n,2n) reactions. Absorption is implicitly treated by applying the non-absorption probability to neutron weights at each collision point. GEMER's bias has been determined in an extensive validation against critical experiments O to vary from +0.006 to-0.021 over the range of moderation in the fuel mixtures considered in this analysis. For undermoderated mixtures with II/U atomic ratios less than about 5, the bias is positive denoting that neutron multiplication factors are over-predicted. The bias then decreases almost

September 9,1993 page 6 of 20 linearly to -0.015 at an H/U ratio of about 25. Beyond this point, the bias decreases slowly to an H/U of about 40. These values span the range considered for the BU-7 container since the highest degree of moderation relevant to this analysis corresponds to an H/U ratio of about 28. A value of-0.021 for the bias is conservative for all calculations considered here. F. Modelling of Geometry The geometry model used in this analysis of the BU-7 containeris illustrated in Figure 2 and the GEMER.4 geometry input is tabulated in Tables 5 through 7. The BU-7 was modelled with the 35.40 cm diameter,70.2 cm high inner containment vessel filled with UO particles oriented 2 perpendicularly to the axis of the BU-7 and water surrounding the pellets to the height specified in Table 8A-C. The heights were essentially determined by dividing the applicable UO mass limit 2 (e.g.,20.0 kg at 5.0% enrichment) by the product of the average UO mixture density (although the 2 particles are modelled explicitly) and the Boral liner's inside area. Note that due to a difference between the minimum liner height (26 inches or 66.04 cm) and the height of the inner containment vessel (27.6 inches or 70.2 cm), a 4.16 cm gap exists. This gap in height is conservatively modelled by aligning the liner against the top of the inner drum, so that the UO and water mixture is not 2 surrounded by boron in the bottom of the vessel. This small amount of volume is accounted for in the mixture height calculation. The Boral liner is modelled as having a minimum thickness and maximum outer radius (i.e., the liner is treated as if it were flush against the wall of the inner containment vessel). This treatment maximizes the outer radius of the UO and water mixture. While this modelling results g 2 in the maximum mass ofliner material in the BU-7, the effect of the maximizing the Boral ma.es is relatively small in comparison with the impact of the geometric buckling. Maximizing the radius of the liner is a conservative treatment in the calculations. Orientation of the cylindrical particle axes makes no significant difference in multiplication, but they are modelled in this fashion to take advantage of the geometry features of teh GEMER.4 code. Note that the particles are explicitly modelled. This is, of course, the key difference between models with mixtures of powder and models containing particles. The heterogeneous case modelled here will be shown to be more reactive. Because of the heterogeneous effect, the most reactive particle size (diameter) must be considemd. Therefore, cases are run to determine the most reactive particle diameter and the most reactive moderator content. This is done for the normal case which is unrestricted in terms of the amount of moderation which may be present. The optimum particle diameter is then used in the single container analysis and the water-to-fuel volume ratio is again varied to find a new optimum moderation point for the single container. Although this is a computer-time intensive task, this method explicitly accounts for both moderator and heterogeneous effects in the determineation of the most reactive configuration of containers and contents. The water-to-fuel volume ratio (WTOF) is determined by the ratio of volumes of the water surrounding the particle (determined by the pitch of the array) and the volume of the particle itself. The water-to-fuel ratio is related to the pitch and diameter as: WTOF = (Pitch)2 _9p2 4(pitch)2 -1 = D2 rrD2

September 9,1993 page 7 of 20 O An average density of the materials may be calculated (although this is not explicitly used in any of the present calculations) for each of the water-to-fuel volume ratios calculated. This a!!ows calculation of the total mass of the fuel and water in the contanment vessel as well as a height calculation. The average density in the container is given by: 0""' " 4TOF + 16.96 (1 + MTOF) The height is the total height of the water / fuel array of particles in the inner containment vessel. This height is related to the average density of material and the total amount of UO in the 2 containment vessel. The height may be calculated as: Mass (UO ) - h;,,, - h ;na, gave (1 - w&gg2o) x r,2 2 g vessel ^ Height = ' + h;,,, - h;na, 7 Qave (1 - wfjy20) 3 r, inner vessel vessel The heights were determined by dividing the applicable UO mass (eg.,20.0 kg UO at 5.0% 2 2 enrichment less the amount of mixture in the region which may not surrounded by the liner) by the product of the average UO component density for the mixture and the inner containment vessel's 2 2 2 base area (equal to n x 17.70 cm ) as shown above. These heights are shown in Tables 6A-C as O refereeced frem the ba e of the inner ceetainment ves8ei. whereas the modei has as it reference the center of the BU-7 inner containment vessel (a constant difference of 35.1 cm). For the case of Infinite Arrays of Normal Containers, the model in Figure 2 was placed in a triangular pitch array and spatially reflected on all six sides with varying amounts of interspersed water in the phenolic resin (Regions 2,11,13,23 and 27 in Table 5) and in the regions outside of the outer container. The UO contents for this caseis taken to be 20 kg U(5.00%)O + Optimum H 0. It 2 2 2 has been shown previously,9 that when the fuel mixture is " smeared" from the minimum to 6 maximum volume, thereby occupying the entire volume but reducing the material densities, the effective multiplication value goes down. Therefore, the maximum fuel densities (given in Table 1) and water densities and their corresponding heights (from Tables 8A-C) are used in this analysis. For the accident case of the Arrays of Damaged Containers, the array was modelled as an 9

• 7 4 triangular pitch array of BU-7 containers tightly reflected on all six sides by at least 30.5 cm of water. The 9
• 7
• 4 triangular pitch array is the one having a minimum of at least 250 units whose dimension is closest to a cube and therefore has the minimum geometrical buckling. The geometry input for the array of damaged containers is shown in Table 6. Each BU-7 was modelled as in Figure 2 and the interspersed water was again added to the phenolic resin insulation (Regions 2,11.

13,23 and 27 in Table 3). Since the accident array is really a subset and therefore bounded by the infinite array of optimally moderated BU-7s, only a single verifying case was run for the finite array accident case. For the Single Container case, the BU-7's outer 55 gallon drum was tightly reflected on all 6 Q sides by at least 30 cm of full density water and water was assumed to leak into the inner containment vessel. Full density water was also added to the phenolic resin (Regions 2,11,13,23 and 27 in Table 7). l

= September 9,1993 page 8 of 20 94 17.70 28.575 z 45.3692 - - - - - -

---

e---------------------

i - - - - - Interspersed Water 44.4167 - - - - - - Carbon Steel l 44.308 - - - - - - Phenolic Resin l 36.688 - - - - - - Interspersed Water C ~ a 35.5763 - - - - - - 35.10 - - - - - - r b o n Boral Liner i S t e! 1 l, sa s s.. esa a s...se < JJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJ. J,,J J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J. J.,J. JJ Heterogeneous a, J J * * * * *2 + H O region J, JJ UO 2

• • • • • • • • J<-

-30.94- - - - - - - JJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJtb. JJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJ'8 -35.10 - - - - - - carten sicci ; -35.2087 - - - - - - l Phenolic Resin,' l i -42.8287 - - - - - - l e l -42.9374 - - - - - - Carbon Steel 2 Interspersid Water -44.8424 - - - - - - ------------------.--*--------.---------- s O

17.808 23.495-28.684-'

17.363 Dimensions in cm. O Figure 2 GEMER Geometry Model for BU-7 Container e- ~. y

September 9,1993 .page 9 0f 20 0 Table 5 GEA1ER Geometry Alodel for Infinite Arrays of Containers -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 BOX TYPE 1 /* LOWER PORTION OF BU-7 1 CYLINDER 3 17.808 -35.10 -35.2087 16*0.5 2 CYLINDER 5 28.575 -35.10 -42.8287 16*0.5 3 CYLINDER 3 28.5755 -35.10 -42.9374 16*0.5 4 CYLINDER 2 28.576 -35.10 -44.8424 16*0.5 5 CYLINDER 3 28.684 -35.10 -44.8424 16*0.5 BOX TYPE 2 /* SINGLE BU-7 6 CUBOID 4 59.2 -59.2 59.2 -59.2 75.85 -75.33 16*0.5 l BOX TYPE 3 /* UPPER PORTION OF BU-7 } 7 CYLINDER 4 17.364 35.10 height 16*0.5 8 CYLINDER 3 17.429 35.10 height 16*0.5 9 CYLINDER 6 17.632 35.10 height 16*0.5 10 CYLINDER 3 17.808 35.10 height 16*0,5 11 CYLINDER 5 23.495 35.5763 height 16*0.5 12 CYLINDER 2 23.4955 36.688 height 16*0.5 13 CYLINDER 5 28.575 44.308 height 16*0.5 14 CYLINDER 3 28.5755 44.4167 height 16*0.5 15 CYLINDER 2 28.576 45.3692 height 16*0.5 16 CYLINDER 3 28.684 45.3692 height 16*0.5 O BOX TYPE 4 /* FUEL CYLINDER CELL-WATER-TO-FUEL = 12.00 17 YCYLINDER 1 0.0952 17.70 -17.70 16*0.5 18 CUBOID 4 0.3040 -0.3040 17.70 -17.70 0.3040 -0.3040 16*0 5 BOX TYPE 5 /* INTERMEDIATE DISK OF FUEL CYLINDERS 19 CYLINDER 4 17.364 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 20 CYLINDER 3 17.429 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 21 CYLINDER 6 17.632 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 22 CYLINDER 3 17.808 pitch 0.0 16*0,5 23 CYLINDER 5 28.575 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 24 CYLINDER 3 28.684 pitch 0.0 16*0,5 BOX TYPE 6 /* INTERMEDIATE DISK OF FUEL CYLINDERS-BOTTOM, NO BOR,AL 25 CYLINDER 4 17.700 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 ) 26 CYLINDER 3 17.808 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 27 CYLINDER 5 28.575 pitch 0.0 16*0.5-28 CYLINDER 3 28.684 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 BOX TYPE 7 /* PROBLEM BOX FOR TRIANGULAR ARRAY -~ONE LAYER DEEP 29 CUBOID 2 215.15 -215.15 227.7 -227.7 45.3692 -44 8424 16*0.5 30 CORE O 215.15 -215.15 227.7 -227.7 45.3692 -44.8424 16*0.5 7 1 1 1 11 1 11 1 1 BEGIN COMPLEX l '/* PLACE PINS INTO FLAT DISK COMPLEX. 5 4 -17.70 0.0 0.3040 59 1 1 0.6080 0.0 0.0 /* WITH LINER COMPLEX 6 4 -17.70 0.0 0.3040 59 1 1 0.6080 0.0 0,0 /* NO LINER /* PLACE BOTTOM, DISKS AND TOP PORTIONS INTO BU-7 COMPLEX 2 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 1 1 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 COMPLEX 2 6 0.0 0.0 -35.10 1 17 0.0 0.0 0.6081 /* NO LINER { 4 ([); COMettx 2 5 0.0 0.0 -30.8433 1 1 34 0.0 0.0 0.6081 /* w1Ta t1NER COMPLEX 2 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 1 11 0.0 0.0 0.0 e .-y _,i_m.-e-.4...

September 9,1993 page 10 of 20 0 Table 5 (cont'd) GEMER Geometry Model for Infinite Arrays of Containers /* PLACE BU-7S INTO PROBLEM BOX ONE HALF AT A TIME COMPLEX 7 2 -186.465 -199.015 0.0 7 51 57.37 99.50 0.0 COMPLEX 7 2 -157.78 -149.266 0.0 7 4 1 57.37 99.50 0.0 Mate' rials: 1 UO + H O 2 2 2 Interspersed Water 3 Carbon Steel 4 Water Reflector (Full Density Water) 5 Phenolic Resin (Minimum Density) and Interspersed Water 6 Boral(75% Boron density) Note: Region Numben 1 through 30 noted on the left are for information only and are not part of geometry input. Nx, Nzl, Nz2 are integers such that: Nx 2 2x17.70/ pitch: Nzl=(hmner-hlmer)/ pitch; Nz2 = (remaining height)/ pitch

• Determined from height of fuel mixture. See Table 8A-C.

O O

September 9,1993 page 11 of 20 () Table 6 GEMER Geometry Model for 9

• 7
• 4 Triangular Accident Array of Containers j

I BOX TYPE 1 /

• LOWER PORTION OF BU-7 1

CYLINDER 3 17.808 -35.10 -35,2087 16*0.5 2 CYLINDER 5 28.575 -35.10 -42.8287 16*0.5 3 CYLINDER 3 28.5755 -35.10 -42.9374 16*0.5 4 CYLINDER 2 28.576 -35.10 -44.8424 16*0.5 5 CYLINDER 3 28.684 -35.10 -44.8424 16*0.5 BOX TYPE 2 /* SINGLE BU-7 6 CUBOID 4 59.2 -59.2 59.2 -59.2 75.85 -75.33 16*0.5 BOX TYPE 3 /* UPPER PORTION OF BU-7 .7 CYLINDER 4 17.364 35.10 heignt 16*0.5 8 CYLINDER 3 17.429 35.10 height 16*0.5 9 CYLINDER 6 17.632 35.10 height 16*0.5 10 CYLINDER 3 17.808 35.10 height 16*0.5 11 CYLINDER 5 23.495 35.5763 height 16*0.5 12 CYLINDER 2 23.4955 36.688 height 16*0.5 13 CYLINDER 5 28.575 44.308 height 16*0.5 j-14 CYLINDER 3 28.5755 44.4167 height 16*0.5 15 CYLINDER 2 28.576 45.3692 height 16*0.5 16 CYLINDER 3 28.684 45.3692 height

• 6*0.5 7-p.

BOX TYPE 4 /* FUEL CYLINDER CELL-WATER-TO-FUEL = 12.00 17 YCYLINDER 1 0.0952 17.70 -17.70 16*0.5 18 CUBOID 4 0.3040 -0.3040 17.70 -17.70 0.3040 -0.3040 16*0.5 BOX TYPE 5 /* INTERMEDIATE DISK OF FUEL CYLINDERS 19 CYLINDER 4 17.364 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 20 CYLINDER 3 17.429 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 21 CYLINDER 6 17.632 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 22 CYLINDER 3 17.808 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 23 CYLINDER 5 28.575 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 24 CYLINDER 3 28.684 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 BOX TYPE 6 /* INTERMEDIATE DISK OF FUEL CYLINDERS-BOTTOM, NO BORAL 25 CYLINDER 4 17.700 pitch 0.0 16*0,5 ? 26 CYLINDER 3 17.808 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 27 CYLINDER 5 28.575 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 28 CYLINDER 3 28.684 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 BOX TYPE 7 /* PROBLEM BOX FOR TRIANGULAR ARRAY - ONE LAYER DEEP 29 CUBOID 2 215.15 -215.15 227.7 ~227.7 45.3692 -44.8424 16*0.5 30 CORE O 215.15 -215.15 227.7 -227.7 181.4768 -179.3696 16*0.5 31 CUBOID 4 246.15 -246.15 258.7 -258.7 212.4768 -210.3696 16*0.5 7 111 1-1 1 1 1 1 1 BEGIN COMPLEX /* PLACE PINS INTO FLAT DISK COMPLEX 5 4 -17.70 0.0 0.3040 59 1 1 0.6080 0.0 0.0 /* WITH LINER COMPLEX 6 4 -17.70 0.0 0.3040 59 1 1 0.6080 0.0 0.0 /* NO LINER /* PLACE BOTTOM, DISKS AND TOP PORTIONS INTO BU-7 COMPLEX 2 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 111 0.0 0.0 0.0 COMPLEX 2 6 0.0 0.0 -35.10 117 0.0 0.0 0.6081 /* NO LINER 0 COMPLEX 2 5 0.0 0.0 -30.8433 1 1 34 0.0 0.0 0.6081 /* WITH LINER COMPLEX 2 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 111 0.0 0.0 0.0 l

September 9,1993 page 12 of 20 0 Table 6 (cont'd) GEMER Geometry Model for 9 = 7 = 4 Triangular Accident Arrays of Containers /* PLACE BU-7S INTO PROBLEM BOX ONE HALF AT A TIME COMPLEX 7 2 -186.465 -199.015 0.0 7 51 57.37 99.50 0.0 COMPLEX 7 2 -157.78 -149.266 0.0 74 1 57.37 99.50 0.0 UO + H O Materials: 1 2 2 2 Interspersed Water 3 Carbon Stect 4 Water Reflector (Full Density Water) 5 Phenolic Resin (Minimum Density) and Interspersed Water 6 Boral (75% Boron density) Note: Region Numbers 1 through 31 noted on the left are for infonnation only and are not part of geometry input. Nx, Nzl. Nz2 are integers such that: Nx 2 2x17.70/ pitch; Nzl=(hmner-h ner)/ pitch; Nz2 = (remaining height)/ pitch ti

• Determined from height of fuel mixture. See' Table 8A-C.

O i O

September 9,1993 page 13 of 20 0 Table 7 GEMER Geometry Model for Single Container BOX TYPE 1 /* LOWER PORTION OF BU-7 1 CYLINDER 3 17.808 -35.10 -35.2087 16*0.5 2 CYLINDER 5 28.575- -35.10 -42.8287 16*0.5 3 CYLINDER 3 28.5755 -35.10 -42.9374 16*0.5 4 CYLINDER 2 28.576 -35.10 -44.8424 16*0.5 5 CYLINDER 3 28,684 -35.10 -44.8424 16*0.5 BOX TYPE 2 /* SINGLE BU-7 6 CUBOID 4 59.2 -59.2 59.2 -59.2 75.85 -75.33 16*0.5 BOX TYPE 3 /* UPPER PORTION OF BU-7 7 CYLINDER 4 17.364 35.10 height 16*0.5 8 CYLINDER 3 17.429 35.10 height 16*0.5 9 CYLINDER 6 17.632 35.10 height 16*0.5 10 CYLINDER 3 17.808 35.10 height 16*0.5 11 CYLINDER S 23.495 35.5763 height 16*0.5 12 CYLINDER 2 23.4955 36.688 height 16*0.5 13 CYLINDER 5 28.575 44.308 height 16*0.5 14 CYLINDER 3 28.5755 44.4167 height 16*0.5 15 CYLINDER 2 28.576 45.3692 height 16*0.5 16 CYLINDER 3 28.684 45.3692 height 16*0.5 BOX TYPE 4 /* FUEL CYLINDER CELL-WATER-TO-FUEL = 12.00 17 YCYLINDER 1 0.0952 17.70 -17.70 16*0.5 18 CUBOID 4 0.3040 -0.3040 17.70 -17.70 0.3040 -0.3040 16*0.5 BOX TYPE 5 /* INTERMEDIATE DISK OF FUEL CYLINDERS 3 O 19 CYLINDER 4 17.364 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 20 CYLINDER 3 17.429 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 21 CYLINDER 6 17.632 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 22 CYLINDER 3 17.808 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 23 CYLINDER 5 28.575 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 24-CYLINDER 3 28.684 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 BOX TYPE 6 /* INTERMEDIATE DISK OF FUEL CYLINDERS-BOTTOM, NO BORAL 25 CYLINDER 4 17.700 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 26 CYLINDER 3 17.808 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 27 CYLINDER 5 28.575 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 28 CYLINDER 3 28.684 pitch 0.0 16*0.5 2 1 1 1 1 11 111 1 BEGIN COMPLEX l /* PLACE PINS INTO FLAT DISK COMPLEX 5 4 -17.70 0.0 0.3040 NX 1 1 pitch 0.0 0.0 /* WITH LINER COMPLEX 6 4 -17.70 0.0 0.3040 NX 1 1 pitch 0.0 0.0 /* NO LINER /* PLACE BOTTOM, DISKS AND TOP PORTIONS INTO BU-7 COMPLEX 2 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 111 0.0 0.0 0.0 COMPLEX 2 6 0.0 0.0 -35.10 1 1 NZ1 0.0 0.0 pitch /* NO LINER COMPLEX 2 5 0.0 0.0 -30.8433 1 1 NZ2 0.0 0.0 pitch /* WITH LINER COMPLEX 2 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 111 0.0 0.0 0.0 . UO + H O Materials: 1 2 2 2 Interspersed Water 3 Carbon Steel 4 Water Reflector (Full Density Water) 5 Phenolic Resin (Minimum Density) and Full Density Water 6 Boral(75% Boron density) Note: Region Numbers 1 through 28 noted on the left are for information only and are not part of geometry input. Nx, Nzl, Nz2 are integers such that Nx 2 2x17.70/ pitch; Nz1=(h nner-h mer)/ pitch: Nz2 = (remaining height)/ pitch i t

• Determined from height of fuel mixture. See Table 8A-C.

P

September 9,1993 page 14 of 20 ) O \\ l Table 8A. Fuel / Water IIcights and Pitches for Theoretical Density U(5.0)O2 l l Particles Surrounded by WTOF H O 2 MASS UO2 20 KG Enrichment 5.0% wt% l Pellet radius 0.0635 cm l WTOF WTFR pitch height (cm) (cm) 1 0.08 0.1590 3.685 2 0.15 0.1940 5.613 3 0.21 0.2250 7.539 4 0.27 0.2510 9.466 5 0.31 0.2750 11.388 6 0.35 0.2970 13.312 j 7 0.39 0.3180 15.239 j 8 0.42 0.3370 17.169 i l 9 0.45 0.3550 19.100 10 0.48 0.3730 21.019 l ) 11 0.50 0.3890 22.953 12 0.52 0.4050 24.873 J 13 0.54 0.4210 26.809 14 0.56 0.4350 28.730 j i Table 8H. Fuel / Water IIcights and Pitches forTheoretical Density U(5.0)O2 Particles Surrounded by WTOF II 0 l 2 \\ MASS UO2 20 KG l Enrichment 5.0% wt% l Particle radius 0.0952 cm WTOF WTFR pitch height (cm) (cm) 1 0.08 0.2380 3.686 2 0.15 0.2920 5.609 3 0.21 0.3370 7.535 4 0.27 0.3770 9.456 5 0.31 0.4130 11.382 6 0.35 0.4460 13.312 7 0.39 0.4770 15.246 8 0.42 0.5060 17.162 9 0.45 0.5330 19.100 10 0.48 0.5590 21.019 11 0.50 0.5840 22.938 g 12 0.52 0.6080 24.881 13 0.54 0.6310 26.801 14 0.56 0.6530 28.722

September 9,-l993 page 15 of20 Table 8C. Fuel / Water IIcights and Pitches for Theoretical Density U(3.0)O2 Particles Surrounded by WTOF II 0 l 2 MASS UO2 20 KG Enrichment 5.0% wt% Particle radius 0.15875 cm WTOF NTFR pitch height (cm) (cm) 1 0.08 0.3150 3.681 2 0.15 0.3860 5.614 3 0.21 0.4460 7.532 4 0.27 0.4990 9.458 5 0.31 0.5470 11.389 6 0.35 0.5900 13.302 7 0.39 0.6310 15.241 8 0.42 0.6690 17.157 9 0.45 0.7060 19.101 10 0.48 0.7400 21.020 11 0.50 0.7730 22.939 12 0.52 0.8050 24.858 O 13 0.54 0.8350 26.811 14 0.56 0.8640 28.732 III. CRITICALITY SAFETY ANALYSIS RESUIll'S Tables 9 through 12 present the results of the GEMER calculations performed with the fuel materials and geometry models described in Section II. The results are all suberitical, with the most limiting case being the normal condition array with zero interspersed water. Each of the three cases is discussed in more detail in the following sections. A. Results for Infinite Arrays of Undamaged Containers The results of the analysis of the triangular pitch infinite array of undamaged containers are shown in Table 9 fork as a function ofinterspersed water density and particle diameter. The most reactive particle diameter in the BU-7 configuration is 0.075". The results in Table 9 show e maximum k. ofless than 0.91 for the infinite array of(normal) BU-7 containers. Single containet results have previously tended to be the most reactive because the fuel in the nonnal and accident ~ cases have been dry-due to the integrity of the inner containment vessel under hypothetical acciden conditions. However, for conditions in which uncontrolled moderation (by water)of the containers is considered, the single container is less reactive than the arrays since individual containers in the arrays with full density interspersed moderator between packages may not only interact witit adjacent containers, but are practically fully reDected themselves. In this respect, the single container and the accident array both are subsets of the normal condition array. O Table 10 shows the results for the most reactive particle diameter and internal moderation as a function ofinterspersed moderator density between the containers for the infinite trianguhtr array, 1

September 9,1993 page 16 of 20 Consistent with other analyses 1011, the optimum interspersed water for the nonnal case is 0.0. This allows maximum interaction between the already optimally moderated containers. This is an indication that components in the liner, phenolic resin and steel are more effective as absorbers when the neutrons are slowed down outside of the container. Since the maximum keg + 20 value is less than 0.9290 (the limit of suberiticality including the method bias), the BU-7 with up to 20 kg U(5.00)O per container with the assumption ofloss of 2 containment (in the pails) and no restriction on moderation meets the applicable requirements for a Fissile Class I package. Table 9 GEMER Results for Infinite Arrays of Undamaged Containers with Theoretical Density U(5.0)O2 Particles as a Function of WTOF 1I 0 and Pellet Diameter 2 Pellet Diameter 0.050" 0.075" 0.100" Water-to-Fuel

• Keff Keff Keff (c)

(c) (c) 10 0.9004 0.9020 0.8980 (.0026) (.0032) (.0027) 12 0.9000 0.9038 0.8976 (.0027) (.0026) (.0027) 14 0.8978 0.8947 0.8843 (.0028) (.0027) (.0025)

• WTOF = Water-TO-Fuel ratio Table 10 GEMER Results for Inflinte Arrays of Undamaged Containers Particles as a Functiori of with Theoretical Density U(5.0)O2 Interspersed 110 for Most Reactive Particle Diameter 2

Interspersed Pellet Diameter =0.075" i Water Keff o 0.00 0.9038 0.0026 0.05 0.8781 0.(X)27 0.10 0.8705 0.0029 0.25 0.8403 0.0025 0.50 0.8266 0.0028 1.0 0.8273 0.0023 O, i Fraction of full density water

September 9,1993 page 17 of 20 O B. Results for Arrays of Damaged Containers As noted above, the most reactive condition for the Fissile Class 1 BU-7 container is the triangular pitch array of optimally moderated containers. The accident array of 9 7

• 4 damaged containers is a subset of the infinite normal condition array and one would normally expect the results for the finite array to show a less reactive configuration than for the infinite array of Section Ill. A. This is demonstrated by the single calculation summarized in Table 11 which indicates a kerr+

20 of 0.8512 for the 0.075" diameter particle case of theoreticaldensity UO2 at a water-to-fuel ratio of 12. This value is less than the infinite array value of 0.9090 given by Table 9. These tables verify that the trends are as stated and shows consistency of the results within the analysis. Table 11 GEMER Results for 9 7 4 Triangular Array of Damaged BU-7 Containers with Theoretical Density U(5.0)O and WTOF 2 11 0 2 Water-TO-Fuel Dia.=0.075" Kerr ( o) 12 0.8460 (.(X)26) C. Results for Single Containers The analysis for the fully reflected, single container uses the optimum particle diameter results obtained in Section III.A. The GEMER results in Table 12 show a maximum kerr + 20 of 0.8357 for the case in which the WTOF is 12 for 20 kg of UO at 5.0% enrichment. The single 2 container is therefore not the most limiting case as it has been in prior considerations of pellets in the BU-7 container. Current analyses for the pellets are, however, consistent with the present analysis H insofar as the limiting cases are now the arrays of optimally moderated containers..The results are also bounded by (less reactive than) the 5.0% enrichment case analyzed in Reference 10 and the infinite array of normal containers shown in Table 9. The neutron multiplication factor for the fully moderated and fully reflected single container is suberitical, including the bias of-0.021 which is consistent with this analysis. In prior analyses of the BU-7 container, the Single Container results have tended to be the most reactive because the fuel in the normal and accident array cases were both accepted as dry. However, for conditions in which uncontrolled moderation (by water) of the array of containers is considered, the single container is less reactive than the normal or accident arrays since individual containers in the accident array with full density interspersed water between packages not only interact with adjacent containers, but are practically fully reflected themselves. (This is evident by comparing the results in Table 9 with those in Table 12). O

September 9,1993 page 18 of 20 Table 12 GENIER Results for Fully Reilected Single IlU-7 Containers with Theoretical Density U(5.0)O and WTOF II 0 2 2 WTOF Dia.=0.075" Kerr ( c) 9 0.8241 (.0029) 10 0.8267 (.0031) 11 0.8301 (.0028) 12 0.8245 (.0029) 13 0.8223 (.0025) 14 0.8200 (.0027) 9 O

September 9,1993 page 19 of 20 O D. Presence of Plastic Bags or Other Moderating Materials Around the Uramum l Compound (or Uranium Compound Containers) It is sometimes desirable to ship uranium-bearing scrap enclosed in plastic bags in the BU-7 container. The bags may be around the fuel either inside or outside of the three or five gallon pails. For the BU-7 container with the contents and assumptions described in the previous sections of this report, the presence of these bags is acceptable. Since the scrap is modelled as having optimum 1 moderation by water, even under normal conditions, any amount of moderation, including plastic bags,is acceptable. Also, since the contents of the BU-7 container with uranium oxide particles has explicitly modeled heterogeneous fuel regions, the geometry regions bordering the inner containment vessel are water regions. Since the water content is optimum for nonnal and accident cases, any additional moderators such as the plastic bag, are already accounted for by the model as it has been constructed and analyzed. IV.

SUMMARY

AND CONCLUSION i This analysis has demonstrated that the BU-7 shipping container meets the requirements of 10CFR71.55 and 57 for a Fissile Class I package with contents specified as follows: Type and Form a 235 Scrap containing uranium oxide enriched to not more than 5.0 w/o in the U isotope, and O with no specific limit on moderation by water, carbon, or either of their equivalents. Maximum Quantity per Package The maximum contents per package shall be as follows: Maximum Enrichment Uranium Mass (%) (kg) 5.00 17.63 V. REFERENCES r 1. U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission " Certificate of Compliance for Radioactive Materials Packages", Certificate Number 9019 Revision 18, 2. " Packaging and Transportation of Radioactive Material", United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Rules and Regulations, Title 10, Chapter 1, Part 71, Code of Federal Regula-tions,11/30/88. 3.. " Test Report for Model BU-7 Bulk Uranium Shipping Container",4/25/80. 4. " Criticality Analysis of BU-7 Container for Theoretical Density Pellets",1/24/86.

September 9,1993 page 20 of 20 5. " Criticality Safety Analysis of BU-7 Shipping Container for UO Powder",3/6/80. 2 6. " Criticality Safety Analysis for BU-7 Shipping Container for 4.0% to 5.0% Enriched UO2 Powder with Failure of Containment and hkxieration Control",6/1/92. 7. "The General Electric Model BU-7 Uranium Shipping Container-Criticality Safety Analy-sis", 2/74. 8. GEMER/ MONTE CARLO, User's Manual,9/15/81. 9. " Criticality Safety Analysis for BU-7 Shipping Container for UO at 4.025% Enrichment", 2 7/7/92, Transnuclear, Inc. 10. " Criticality Safety Analysis for BU-7 Shipping Container For Enrichments Below 5.0% UO Powder with Failure of Containment and Moderation Control",8/31/93. 2 11. " Criticality Safety Analysis for BU-7 Shipping Container For Enrichments Below 4.1% UO Pellets / Powder with Failure of Containment and Moderation Control",9/9/93. 2 O O

APPENDIX G DESIGN, MANUFACTURE AND QUALITY CONTROL FOR THE BORAL LINER O 6 I LICENSE. SNM-1097 DATE 09/14/93 PAGE DOCKET 71-9019 REVISION O G

~ t i APPENDIX G DESIGN, MANUFACTURE AND QUALITY CONTROL FOR THE BORAL LINER' i I. INTRODUCTION j Boral is a thermal neutron poison material composed of I boron carbide and 1100 alloy aluminum. Boron carbide is a compound having a high boron content in a physically stable and chemically inert form. The 1100 alloy aluminum is a light-weight metal with high tensile strength which is protected from corrosion by a highly i resistant oxide film. The two materials, boron carbide and aluminum, are chemically compatible and ideally 4 suited for long-term use. Boral is an ideal neutron absorbing / shielding material { because of the following reasons-l 1 1. The content and placement of boron carbide provides a very high removal cross section for thermal 'l neutrons. = t .f 2. Boron carbide, in the form of fine particles, is homogeneously dispersed throughout the central layer i of the Boral panels. i 3. The boron carbide and aluminum materials in Boral 7 are totally unaffected by long-term exposure to gamma radiation. f ~! 4 l LICENSE SNM-1097 DATE 09/14/93 PAGE O. DOCKET 71-9019 REVISION 0 G-1

4. The neutron absorbing central layer of Boral is clad with permanently attached surfaces of aluminum. h 5. Boral is stable, strong, durable, and corrosion resistant. II. DESIGN The Boral liner is a sandwich design consisting of.080" minimum thickness Boral surrounded and protected full length on both sides by 22 gauge (.030") 300 series stainless steel. The liner maximum OD is 13.5" and the minimum is 12.875". The liner is 26" minimum in height. The minimum B10 content of the Boral is.011 grams / cm2, Two lifting holes are located in the top 1/2" of the liner and stainless steel eyelets inserted thru the holes provide for wear resistance as well as a secondary means of connecting the liner materials. O Buckling calculations were performed on the liner using the two stainless steel layers only for strength for the hypothetical accident condition 30 foot drop tests. The calculations showed the liner has a factor of safety of more than 2. This design provides for complete protection of the Boral from any handling or shipping damage since it is protected from the powder pails on the inside and the walls of the inner container on the outside by the two layers of stainless steel. In addition, the stainless steel provides for easy cleanup of any contamination. The verification of the presence of the Boral is easily f LICENSE SNM-1097 DATE 09/14/93 PAGE DOCKET 71-9019 REVISION O G-2

accomplished since its entire diameter is visible from (~D both ends. %) III. MANUFACTURE The first step in the liner fabrication is producing the inside layer of stainless steel. A sheet of 22 gauge material sheared to correct length and width is formed into a diameter and fusion TIG seam welded full length on an automatic welder. Next, Boral panels are formed into full-length semi-circles and fitted around the outside of the stainless steel. The Boral is made of two pieces since its width exceeds the manufacturing capability to produce it in a single sheet. The outside layer of precise length and width stainless is then formed tightly around the Boral halves and again seam welded full length. The resulting fusion weld shrinkage tends to tighten the fit between the Boral and stainless steel layers and results in a very {} tightly layered liner. The final operation is to punch two holes at approximately 180 apart near the top of the liner. A stainless steel eyelet is swaged into each hole which provides wearability and additional strength for lifting the liner out of the BU-7. A serial number is engraved near the top of the liner to provide traceability to the Boral. LICENSE SNM-1097 DATE 09/14/93 PAGE DOCKET 71-9019 REVISION O G-3

IV. QUALITY CONTROL O Boral is produced by constructing an 1100 series aluminum box, filling the box with a mixture of boron carbide and aluminum powders, and rolling it under heat and pressure into a flat plate. The rolled panel is characterized by a solid aluminum periphery and a center section of solidified B C/ aluminum matrix clad with a 4 thin section of aluminum. The boron carbide particle in this central layer averages 85 microns in diameter and the average spacial separation is 1.25 to 1.50 particle diameters. The control of boron content starts with a QC verification of each B C/ aluminum powder mixture prior 4 to the rolling operation. Each batch of powder will make about 5 ingots where each ingot makes one rolled sheet of Boral or about 2 % BU ' liners. O The hot rolling operation is the critical operation in the fabrication of Boral. The rolling mill produces a slightly concave lateral surface profile (thicker in the middle than on the edges) and a slight taper in thickness from one end to the other. Therefore, the thinnest cross section of a Boral panel can be found at one of the four corners. This observation is of primary importance in the quality control program since extensive testing has shown that BiC areal density is roughly proportional to thickness of the panel. Destructive analysis of several panels with Bio areal density readings taken along the diagonals of the panel confirm the conclusion that boron areal densities are lh LICENSE SNM-1097 DATE 09/14/93 PAGE DOCKET 71-9019 REVISION 0 G-4

t highest in the center of the panel and sampling at the {} corners locates the lowest boron areal density. The quality control sampling plan for B10 areal density utilizes a wet chemistry technique to determine Bio content and is based on 95% confidence that 95% of the population will exceed the specification minimum of.011 grams B10 per square centimeter. In addition, if any B10 areal density result is below.011, the panel will be rejected and an investigation conducted to determine the extent of the anomaly. Past experience predicts approximately a 5% variation in B10 areal density from the panel edge to the panel center and the test coupon average will be about 13% greater than the specification lower limit of.011. This translates into a target panel central average of .013 grams B10 per square centimeter and an expected (} coupon lower limit of about.0116 grams B10 per square centimeter. A serial number engraved on the surface of the inside layer of stainless steel will provide traceability to the Bio areal density laboratory results. V.

SUMMARY

The Boral liner as discussed in this appendix provides an excellent means of utilizing the thermal neutron absorption capabilities of boron carbide. The liner is removable, easily inspectable for presence of Boral, structurally sound, durable and is easily cleaned and decontaminated. LICENSE SNM-1097 DATE 09/14/93 PAGE DOCKET 71-9019 REVISION 0 G-5

The fabrication process for Boral is very predictable and proven with over 25 years of manufacturing experience. The tight control of boron areal density combined with criticality analyses utilizing only 75% of the specification minimum of B10 results in an extremely reliable and effective neutron poison. O LICENSE SNM-1097 DATE 09/14/93 PAGE DOCKET 71-9019 REVISION O G-6}}