ML20147D207
| ML20147D207 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 07109129 |
| Issue date: | 12/07/1978 |
| From: | NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| To: | NORTHEAST NUCLEAR ENERGY CO. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7812190168 | |
| Download: ML20147D207 (1) | |
Text
-
r h
((
uNitrO STATES g
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMIST,10N 5
ij W ASHIN GTON, D.
C. 20555 DEC 0 71978 FCTR:RH0 71-9129 Northeast Nuclear Energy Company ATTN: Mr. W. G. Counsil P.O. Box 270 Hartford, CT 06101 l
Gentlemen:
l This refers to your application dated August 28, 1978, requesting approval to deliver the Model No. UNI L4-50 packaging to a carrier for transport.
In connection with our review, we need the information identified in the enclosure to this letter.
Please advise us within thirty (30) days from the date of this letter when this information will be provided.
The additional information requested by this letter should be subraitted in the form of revised pages to the original Safety Analysis Report in order to preserve the continuity of your application.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, we will be pleased to meet with you and your staff.
Sincerely, Charles E. MacDonald, Chief Transportation Branch Division of Fuel Cycle and l'aterial Safety
Enclosure:
As stated cc: w/ enc 1 Nuclear Packaging, Inc.
ATTN: Mr. John D. Simchuk 1733 S. Fawcett Tacoma, WA 98402 78121901CoJ' C
NORTHEAST NUCLEAR ENERGY COMPANY MODEL NO. UNI L4-50 SHIPPING PACKAGE Enc 1 to ltr dtd: DEC 0 71978 1.
Revise the drawings to incorporate the revisions discussed on page 0-2.
2.
For the cask lifting and tie-down conditions, shown that the lug would fail prior to the outer or inner shell or shown that the failure of these shells would not impair the containment or shielding properties of the package.
3.
The following items pertain to the tie-down analysis:
a.
Describe the cable-lug attachment method used for tie-down to react longitudinal loads.
b.
Evaluate the lugs, shells and welds for loads normal to the plane of the lug.
c.
Consider the direction of the loads in the plane of the lugs and explain why lug shear-cut is a credible failure mode for an inward or downward applied load.
d.
Evaluate the shells and welds for radial loads.
e.
Combine the effects of loads radial, tangential and longitudinal to the packaging for the evaluation of the welds and shells.
4.
For a bottom end free drop show that the lid would not fail and for a lid end free drop show that the bottom surface would not fail.
5.
The following items refer to the corner free drop test analysis 51.6.6.2.
a.
Justify the use of only steel crushing, page 1-22, considering that the shell is only 3/8" thick, b.
Reference the source for and explain the relevancy of the truncated cylinder equation on page 1-22.
c.
Justify the use of the acceleration equation on page 1-23.
d.
If the lid attachment pre-load or yield strength is exceeded for the normal conditions show that the packaging effectiveness has not been reduced.
Consider fatigue and lid sealing.
()
+V
. e.
The equation used for the large deflection stress, page 1-26, is for a membrane which requires held edges. Also capacities of the three elements separately are not additive.
6.
In the determination of the load path for lateral loads on the lid consider the following:
a.
A load transfer between the lid and bolt through the 3/8" lid plate adjacent to the cask.
The analysis on page 1-29 assumes the load path is only through the top lid plate.
b.
The bolt-to-hole tolerances are plus and minus, meaning that some bolts may have no clearancefor certain lateral loads.
7.
Evaluate packaging containment for a side free drop on the lifting lugs.
8.
If reliance is placed on the lead to steel bond specify the method of attachment on the drawing and provide an evaluation of the joint strength based on verifiable strength properties.
9.
provide justification for the use of ASTM A285 steel for the containment vessel in light of its apparent lack of fracture toughness and high notch sensitivity.
- 10. According to the ASME pressure vessel code,Section II, Part A, 1977 Edition, ASTM A325 and A449 are not equivalent to SAE Grade 7 as noted on page 1-2.
f D
1.
e
<