ML20127K788
| ML20127K788 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 04/30/1985 |
| From: | Macdonald C NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| To: | Greeves J NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| References | |
| REF-WM-47 NUDOCS 8505220188 | |
| Download: ML20127K788 (2) | |
Text
-
[-
i WM Reccid FB W. Pr::, ci __,M 2.
U... M mt..
r.
N-(#
UNITED STATES N
~ PD:t 1/
)
y "E
D0tXET CONTROL I-NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION LPDR CENTER wAssincron, m e. 20sss Distribul.
l
.E
=-
s i
3FPEyEL _Nu Mored -
FI i K +1n d,,
%,*****/'85 HM -2 A10:47 (actura to mt c23 ss).
/
APR 3 01985 MEMORANDtR1 FOR:
John T. Greeves, Acting Chief Engineering Branch, WM, NMSS FROM:
Charles E. MacDonald, Chief Transportation Certification Branch, FCTC, M4SS
SUBJECT:
FIBERGLASS REINFORCED PLASTIC HIGH INTEGRITY CONTAINERS In response to your memorandum of April 5,1985, enclosed is the additional information needed and deficiencies noted to detemine that the subject package meets Type A packaging requirements. Mr. D. T. Huang is our contact for this review.
i f t.b
$4 CharTes E. MacDonald, Chief Transportation Certification Branch Division of Fuel-Cycle and ttaterial Safety, NMSS
Enclosure:
As stated l
I l
- 4 N
' Enc 1 to memo dtd: APR 3 0 MS J1.
The Fibe'rglass Reinforced Plastic (FRP) HIC does not incorporate a
~ tamperproof feature.. A tamperproof feature is required by 10 CFR 571.43(b)
.and 49.CFR 5173.412(b) for.use of a Type A package for transport.
'2.
Therequirementsof10CFR571.45(a)and49CFR6173.411(d)for.
failure of lifting devices under excessive load was not addressed.
3.
It was not shown that the. lifting devices, which. could be' used as
' tie-down. devices, are designed to meet the requirements of 10 CFR 971.45(b) or 49. CFR 6173.412(1).
4.
Clarify.the: discrepancy between the gross package weight shown on Drawing No. B-334-D-0005 and the gross package weight used for the
~
drop tests (shown on Page 4 of Appendix 14). The weight used in all structural tests should be gross weight.
5.
The 45* drop on the closure end ves concluded by the applicant to be the most damaging orientation because it caused both the initial impact on the top corner and the secondary impact or " slap-down" on the container side wall. However, the applicant should also check for possible significant damages caused by the center of gravity over the top corner and bottom corner drops.
t I
i l
l.