ML20203N601

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Opposes Revalidation of Certificate of Compliance 9198 for Gns Castor MTR Cask Since Mechanical Properties of Cask Tested Not Representative of Corresponding Properties of Casks Proposed for Use,In Response to 860320 Request
ML20203N601
Person / Time
Site: 07109198
Issue date: 04/29/1986
From: Macdonald C
NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS)
To: Carriker A
TRANSPORTATION, DEPT. OF
References
NUDOCS 8605050537
Download: ML20203N601 (1)


Text

.-

)ISI$$

Distribution: w/o encl i

CEMacDonald CRChappell RRXSRWKRRIXRikt 71-9198 NMSS R/F FCTC R/F Docket File NRC PDR

[U@gll/// g Pr. A. Wendell Carriker APR 2 91986 Office of Hazardous Paterials 8

U.S. Departrent of Transportation

%gN DHT 221 Uashington, DC 20590

Dear Mr. Carriker:

This is in response to your letter of March 20, 1986, requesting the status of our review on the GNS CASTOR MTR ca:k.

We have received the infomation you requested from GNS. He also met with GNS on February 25, 1986 to discuss the test of the CASTOR MTR. As a result of this meeting, GNS, in a letter of March 20, 1986 (enclosed),

provided additional infomation on the selection of the MTR Drop Test Cask and other tests conducted previously. GNS also provided supplementary infomation concerning test failures of nodular cast iron casks which occurred in 1983.

One basic issue we have discussed with GNS is how they will assure that the material properties of the casks proposed for use would be as good as the material properties of a successful test cask.

Ve have reviewed the infomation pertaining to the test cask and the casks proposed for use. We note they tested the cask which had the lowest fracture toughness (Krn) value. However, the test cask had significantly better ductility properties and higher ferritic content than the casks proposed for use.

We cannot recomend that the certificate for the CASTOR MTR cask be revalidated for use in the U.S.

This is because the mechanical properties of the cask tested by G'IS are not representative of the corresponding properties of the casks proposed for use (except for K values).

ID Since we could not favorably resolve the question concerning materials of construction, we did not review other aspects of the cask design.

Sincerely, Ori;1n "siSned by W ARLESR. n cDONAIsD Charles E. MacDonald, Chief Transportation Certification Branch Division of Fuel Cycle and Material Safety, NMSS M, N Enclosth

-As-stat i

i FCTC...1 FCTC l

. J..

JCiiad411: alm EMacDsal 86050=oS37 860429 c"

" M*

-.;641pisi "04y....ie6'

..,t..

+

l renc ronu ais tio-so3 nacu o24o OFFICIAL RECORD COPY