ML20138F688
| ML20138F688 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 10/21/1985 |
| From: | Frederick Brown NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| To: | Barnhart V GENERAL NUCLEAR SYSTEMS, INC. |
| References | |
| REF-PROJ-M-37 NUDOCS 8510250328 | |
| Download: ML20138F688 (2) | |
Text
-
DCT g 1 1995 Project M-37 General Nuclear Systems, Inc.
ATTN: Mr. Victor J. Barnhart Vice President 135 Darling Drive Avon, Connecticut 06001 TO DISTRIBUTION:
SUBJECT:
REPORT FORWARCED ON SEPTEMBER 30, 1985 It has come to our attention that some copies of the report, " Safety Evaluation Report Related to the Topical Safety Analysis Report for the CASTOR V/21 Dry Spent Fuel Storage Cask Submitted by General Nuclear Systems, Inc. "
may have been missing page 24. Attached please find page 24 to be inserted in your copy. We are sorry for the inconvenience.
Orintnal S1gned By Florence L. Brown Licensing Assistant Advanced Fuel and Spent Fuel Licensing Branch, NMSS
Enclosure:
DISTRIBUTION:
Please return original As stated concurrnce copy to FBrown 55-396 NMSS R/F PDR bec: MSchwartz, LLNL FCAF R/F MSmith, VEPCO LCRouse JRoberts DJBurke, Reg II FSturz TChen, NRR WBrown JDavison JGray 05mith JSchneider JKennedy LAFile CEMacDonald 0 Weiss Project M-37
~
[.
b_.1
.........__1........1........1........1.__......
NAME:FEownh.3:JBol$
r h :
....._4_
DATE;105//85
- 108)/85 0FFICIAL RECOTID COPY DRAFT 10/21/85 M-37/72-2/PL/85/10/21 8510250328 051021 PDR PROJ M-37 PDR
=-
I
.x.
2.
A rigid missile that tests the penetration resistance of the cask as represented by a 125 kg, 20.32 cm (8") armor piercing shell.
3.
A small rigid object such as a solid steel sphere 2.5 cm in diameter which l
may pass through any openings in the protective barriers.
In accordance with the criteria for radiological protection described in Section 2.9 of this SER, the cask must maintain its structural integrity under the impact of tornado generated missiles. -
The TSAR addresses the subject of tornado generated missiles in Sec. 8.2.1.2.2.
This section does not adequately deal with the question of missile impact.
The staff determined that the rigid 125 kg armor piercing shell posed the greatest damage potential to the cask.
The staff has conducted an analysis which indi-cates that the 125 kg armor piercing shell impacting the secondary lid verti-j cally at 88.2 mph will clastically deform both lids, but not penetrate either A double seal failure must, of course, be assumed.
A separate analysis, one.
based on the work of A.C. Hagg and G.O. Sankey (Ref. 4), shows that the shell 1
j striking the cask side horizontally at 126 mph will not cause stresses in the i
cask wall higher than the allowable stress, 18.9 ksi.
In addition, the staff has determined that the high kinetic energy missile, represented by the 1,800 kg automobile impacting the cask at 126 mph, will not cause tip over of the cask, based on momentum conservation, and will not affect the cask structural integrity since stresses in cask body will not exceed the allowable stress.
The TSAR does not address the effect of the 2.5 cm solid steel sphere specified in Section 8.2.1.2.2.
However, since there are no openings in the protective j
barrier represented by the cask body and lids, any other etfect caused by impact
{
of this small missile would be inconsequential compared to the rigid 125 kg missile. The reviewers conclude that tornado generated missiles will not vio-i late the structural integrity of the cask nor significantly affect the radio-logical protection it affords (*>ee Section 11.4 of the SER).
l 24 1
- - - - - - - - - - - -