Text

Application for Amend to Certificate of Compliance 9019, Demonstrating Compliance of BV-7 Shipping Package W/New Requirements of 10CFR71
	ML20205H833
Person / Time
Site:	07109019
Issue date:	01/06/1986
From:	; GENERAL ELECTRIC CO.
To:	;
Shared Package
ML20205H830	List: ML20205H826; ML20205H833;
References
	26281, NUDOCS 8601290238
	Download: ML20205H833 (148)
	v • d • e

{{#Wiki_filter:tN V BU-7 SHIPPING PACKAGE CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE USA /9019/AP CONSOLIDATED APPLICATION JANUARY 6, 1986 O 8601290238 860106 gDR ADOCK 0710 9

GENERALh ELECTRIC pV NUCLEAR FUEL MANUFACTURING DEPARTMENT GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY e P o. BOX 780

W:LMINGTON. NCRTH CAROUNA 28402 January 6, 1986 Mr. Charles E.

MacDonald, Chief Transportation Certification Branch Division of Fuel Cycle & Material Safety U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 f

Dear Mr. MacDonald:

Subject:

COMPLIANCE DEMONSTRATION 'IO NEW 10 CFR 71 REQUIREMENTS

Reference:

Certificate of Compliance USA /9019/AF /U On August 5, 1983, the NRC published a revision notice in the Federal Register, Volume 48, No. 152. The purpose of the revision was intended to make NRC transportation regulations 10 CFR 71 compatible with those of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). On 8/31/85 the revised regulations were issued in 10 CFR 71. During telephone conversations with your office earlier this year, we discussed NFMD's need to have the BU-7 shipping package certified to " Safety Series No. 6, IAEA Safety Standards, Regulations for the Safe Transport of Radioactive Materials, 1973 Revised Edition (As Amended)." At that time, we were informed that in order to obtain approval for the BU-7 as a Type A, Fissile Class I package, we should submit an application to the NRC which demonstrates that our package conforms with the new requirements of 10 CPR 71. Also, an application is required to DOT that identifies how the BU-7 complies with the differences between 10 CFR 71 and the 1973 IAEA Standards. O V

GENER AL @ ELECTRIC Mr. Charles E. MacDonald January 6, 1986 Page 2 General Electric's Nuclear Fuel Manufacturing Department (NFMD) has prepared the attached consolidated application that we believe demonstrates the BU-7 shipping package meets or exceeds all requirements of the revised 10 CFR 71 as they apply to its use in the referenced Certificate of Compliance. This application replaces Sections 1.0 through 6.0 in their entirety and consequently is identified as Revision 0. Sections 1A, 1B, and 1C are included in this submittal for your convenience, but have not been changed f rom the existing approved consolidated application. i A separate submittal will be made to the Department of Transportation describing how the BU-7 package conforms with the differences between 10 CPR 71 and the 1973 IAEA requirements. Pursuant to 10 CPR 170.31, a check for $150 will be forwarded under a separate cover. /~l-}/ General Electric personnel would be pleased to discuss this matter with you and your staff as you may deem necessary. Sincerely, GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY D T. P. Winslow, Manager Licensing & Nuclear Materials Management /sbm i l

1.0 INTRODUCTION

O The BU-7 package is currently authorized by NRC Certificate of Compliance USA /9019/AF as a Fissile Class I container for the transport of fissile radioactive material in the form of uranium dioxide and pellets. A complete series of tests have been conducted on the BU-7 package to verify conformance with the requirements of 10 CFR 71. This application amendment contains a consolidation of all applications and package test results previously submitted in Docket 70-754 ( for NRC License SNM-960), Docket 70-1007 (for NRC License SNM-54), and Docket 71-9019 for license and certificate amendments pursuant to 10 CFR 71 related to the General Electric BU-7 packag e. It is requested that the BU-7 package be () certified as complying with the revised regulatory requirements of 10 CFR Part 71 published in the Federal Register, Volume 48, No. 152, on August 5, 1983, with an ef fective date of September 6,198 3. The purpose of the revision was to make NRC transportation regulations compatible with those of the 1973 International Atomic Energy Agency (I AEA) standards. 2. LICENSE SNM-1097 DATE 1/06/86 PAGE DOCKET 71-9019 REVISION O 1-1 1 m---

2.0 PACKAGE DESCRIPTION s 2.1 General Inner containment is a nominal 16-gallon drum closed by a gasketed, bolted lid, centered and supported within an outer 55-gallon drwn by solid insulating media, and containing two or more steel pails which contain uranium oxide powder and pellets. (See Drawing 112D1592, Revision 4, in Section 6.) 2.2 Gross Weight 370 pounds, maximum 2.3 Uranium Oxide Powder and Pellet Container One or more closed containers, 11.25" inside diameter f abricated of minimum 24-gauge steel, vertically stacked in each BU-7 unit. / l 2.4 BU-7 Inner Containment A nominal 16-g allon, Uniform Freight Classification Rule 40 drum constructed of 18 gauge steel, modified by the welded attachment of a closure flange to accept a 3/16" thick steel lid which is gasketed for resistance to high temperature as shown in Drawing 112D1592, Revision 4, and attached by twelve 5/16" minimum steel bolts. The minimum inside dimensionc of the inner containment drum 13 3/4" diameter by 26 3/4" high. The maximum are hydrogen to uranium atomic ratic in the UO2 fuel mixtures within the inner containment is 1.6 taking into account all sources of hydrogeneous material mixed in with the U0 - 2 LICENSE SNM-1097 DATE 1/06/86 PAGE DOCKET 71-9019 REVISION O 2-1

2.5 BU-7 Outer Container () A nominal 55-gallon, Uniform Freight Classification Rule 40 18-gauge steel drum with a nominal outer dimension height without the cover of 35" and a nominal inner diameter dimension of 22 1/2". 2.6 Insulating Material The inner containment drum is centrally held within the outer container by, and the space between the inner and the outer containers is completely filled with, solid insulating media composed of fire-retardant phenolic foam as specified in Drawing 112D1592, Revision 4. Fo ur 1/4" diameter vent holes equally spaced near the top of the outer container, covered with waterproof tape, would permit steam to escape in the event free moisture in the insulating material were exposed to the heat from an accidental fire during transport. (} 2.7 Package Description - Contents 2.7.1 Type and Form of Material Uranium oxides enriched to not more than 4.00% in U-235; and of bulk density not greater than 4.2 grams per cc. Ammonium oxalate and/or ammonium bicarbonate additives are permitted in containers with UO2 powder subject to the restrictions in Section 2.7.2.2. 2.7.2 Max imum Quantities 2.7.2.1 Uran i um Ox id e Po wd e r - H/U Ra t io < 0. 4 5 For uranium oxide powder with a maximum H/U atomic ratio of 0.45 considering all sources of hydrogeneous material within the inner container, the maximum contents of LICENSE SNM-1097 DATE 1/06/86 PAGE DOCKET 71-9019 REVISION O 2-2

l uranium oxide powder per package and pail shall be () limited to the following: Maximum U-235 Maximum UO2 Maximum 002 enrichment, per pail, per package, w/o kg s gs 3.0 44.5 89.0 3.2 38.9 77.8 3.4 34.6 69.2 3.6 31.1 62.2 3.8 28.3 56.6 4.0 25.7 51.4 The basis for this table is the criticality analysis in C. 2.7.2.2 Uranium oxide Powders - H/U Ratio < 1.6 & C/U Ratio 11.27 For uranium oxide powder with a maximum H/U atomic ratio of 1.6 and with a maximum C/U atomic ratio of 1.27, considering all sources of hydrogeneous material and () carbon additives to the uranium oxide powder within the inner container, the maximum contents of uranium oxide powder per package and pail shall be limited to 35.0 and 70.0 kgs, respectively. These limits apply for all enrichments up to and including 4.00% and are based on the report in Enclosure 18. 2.7.2.3 Uranium Oxide Pellets The maximum contents per package and pail for uranium oxide pellets with a maximum bulk density of 4.2 grams per cc, shall be limited to the following: LICENSE SNM-1097 DATE 1/06/86 PAGE DOCKET 71-9019 REVISION O 2-3

i Maximum U-235 Maximum UO2 Maximum UO2 (% erarichment, per pail, per package, w/o kgs kg s b 2.7 45.0 90.0 2.8 42.9 85.8 2.9 40.1 80.2 3.0 38.1 76.2 3.2 34.1 68.2 ) 3.4 31.0 62.0 3.6 28.5 57.0 3.8 26.4 52.8 4.0 24.7 49.4 These limits are based on the criticality analysis in C. 2.7.2.4 Mixtures of Uranium Oxide Powder and Pellets The maximum contents per package and pai] for mixtures j of uranium oxide powder and pellets shall be limited to the amounts shown in the table in Section 2.7.2.3. .( I i l =f';- \\~# LICENSE SNM-1097 DATE 1/06/86 PAGE DOCKET 71-9019 REVISION O 2-4

3.0 PACKAGE EVALUATION G,r^s 3.1 General There are no components of the packaging or its contents which are subject to chemical or galvanic reaction during normal transportation. The package cannot be opened inadvertently, uses no coolant and has no lifting or tiedown attachments. 3.2 Single Package - Normal Transport Conditions Between March 20 and April 2, 1980, a series of tests were performed on the BU-7 transport package. These tests are described in a report dated April 25, 1980, which is included in Enclosure 1 A to this application. Included in these tests were some simulated normal transport conditions. Not all such conditions were /^V} tested because the package requirements for some of these conditions could be demonstrated to be satisfactory by other means. Two BU-7 packages were loaded with two 5-gallon steel pails, each pail being filled with 45 kgs of UO2 powder containing natural uranium, for a total of 90 kgs of UO2 powder per package. These packages were used for the tests simulating hypothetical accident conditions, as described in the test report (Enclosure 1A). One BU-7 package was loaded with two 5-gallon steel pails containing a total of 93 kgs of lead shots. This package was subjected to tests simulating normal transport conditions. A summary of this information is given in Table 1. LICENSE SNM-1097 DATE 1/06/86 PAGE DOCKET 71-9019 REVISION O 3-1

TABLE 1 m } SINGLE BU-7 TRANSPORT PACKAGE - NORMAL TRANSPORT CONDITIONS Requirement s* Tests Conducted Results (1) Heat. An ambient temperature (1) No tests required. Temperature of 100*F is within of 38'c (100*F) in still air, and normal operating range for insolation according to the materials of construction. following table: INSOLATION DATA 'Ib t al Insolation Form and location for a 12-of surface hour cal /cm2(g period ) Flat surfaces trans-ported horizontally: Base None Other Surfaces 800 Flat surfaces not 200 transported hori-zontally Curved surfaces 400 (2) Cold. An ambient temperature (2) No tests required. Temperature of -40*F is within of 40*C (-40* F) in still air and ch ad e. normal operating range for materials of construction. (3) Reduced external pressure. An (3)(4) Package was submerged in o No water leakage into inner cxternal pressure of 24.5 water to a pressure of 1.50 kg/cm2 containers after 8 hours of kilopascal (3.5 psi absolute). (50 feet of water), then submergence. pressurized and checked for (4) Increased external pressure, leakage in four increments: o No leakage of air from inner An external pressure of 140 containers when pressurized and kilopascal (20 psi) absolute. o 0.75 kg/cm2 for 3 hours held at each pressure increment o 1.0 kg/cm2 for 3 hours for 3 hours. o 1.25 kg/cm,2 for 3 hours o 1.5 kg/cm' for 3 hours (5) Vibration. Vibration normally (5) No tests required. Packages of this type have incident to transport, withstood several years of transport with no occurrences of significant damage due to normal vibration. (6) water spray. A water spray (6) Package was exposed to a water 'Ihere were no signs of water that simulates exposure to spray sufficiently heavy to keep damage to the package. tsinfall of approximately five em all exposed surface except the (two in.) per hour for at least bottom wet for a period of 30 one hour. minutes. I

Pursuant to 10 CFR 71.71 V

LICENSE SNM-1097 DATE 1/06/86 PAGE DOCKET 71-9019 REVISION 0 3-2

TABLE 1 Continued V(3 SINGLE BU-7 TRANSPORT PACKAGE - NORMAL TRANSPORT CONDITIONS Requirement s* Tests Conducted Re sults (7) Free drop. Between 1-1/2 and (7) The package, loaded with 93 There was a slight deformation of 2-1/2 hours after the conclusion kgs of test weight, was dropped 4 the outer container closure ring of the water spray test, a free feet with the closure ring that did not impair its function. drop through the distance impacting onto a flat reinforced There was no damage to the inner cpecified below onto a flat, concrete pad. The test was container seal of the 5-gallon cesentially unyielding, horizontal conducted 2 hours after the water pails, and there was no separation eurface, striking the surface in a spray test. of the closure ring from the lid position for which maximum damage of the outer container. is expected. For Fissile Class II ptekages, this free drop must be preceded by a free drop from a h2ight of 0.3 m (one f t.) on each corner or, in the case of a cylindrical Fissile Class II pickag % onto each of the quarters of each rim. CRITERIA FOR FREE DROP TE3T (WEIGHT / DISTANCE) Free Drop Package Weight Distance Kilograms Pounds Meters Feet 5,000 or (11,000) 1.2 (4) Isss 5,000 to (11,000-10,000 22,000) 0.9 (3) 10,000 to (22,000-0.6 (2) 15,000 33,000) More than More 0.3 (1) 15,000 than 33,000 (8) Corner Drop. Wis test (8) No tests were required. The package gross weight exceeds tpplies only to package. which are 110 pounds. constructed primarily of wood of fiberboard, and do not exceed 110 pounds gross weight. (9) Compression. For packages (9) Weight equal to more than 5 No dalvage to the package due to waighing up to 5000 kg, the times the weight of the package compressiv? loading was found. package must be subjected, for a was applied to the top of the period of 24 hours, to a package for a period of 24 hours. compressive load applied uniformly m e test weight used was 2,440 to the top and bottom of the pounds. ptekage in the position in which thir package would normally be t ransporte d, ne compressive %vM - LICENSE SNM-1097 DATE 1/06/86 PAGE DOCKET 71-9019 REVISION 0 3-3

TABLE 1 - Continued t SINGLE BU-7 TRANSPORT PACKAGE - NORMAL TRANSPORT CONDITIONS Requirement s* Tests Conducted Results lord must be the greater of the following (i) D e equivalent of five times th2 weight.of the packager or (ii) ne equivalent of 12.75 kilopascal (1.85 lb/in2) multiplied by the vertically projected area of the package. (10) Penetration. Impact of the (10) The package was penetration There was a slight indentation hwaispherical end of a vertical tested by impacting the where the 13 pound bar struck the j ctsel cylinder of 3.2 cm (1-1/4 hemispherical end of a vertical container. it did not penetrate in) diameter and six kg (13 lb) steel cylinder 1-1/4" in diameter the package, cats, dropped from a height of one and weighing 13 pounds, and n (40 in) onto the exposed surface dropped from a height of 40" into of the package which is expected the top of the container where it to be most vulnerable to puncture. is most susceptible to a 2e long axis of the cylinder must projectile penetration. be perpendicular to the package surface. 6 C LICENSE SNM-1097 DATE 1/06/86 PAGE DOCKET 71-9019 REVISION 0 3-4

The tests and assessments set forth in Table 1 provide () assurance that the powder or pellet contents are contained in the pails during normal transport and there is no reduction in effectiveness of the package system. It has been demonstrated, moreover, that there would be no water inleakage to the product during normal transport conditions. 3.3 Single Package - Accident Evaluation On February 6, 1978, through February 10, 1978, a series of immersion / pressure tests were conducted on a BU-7 shipping package. These tests are described in a report dated February 10, 1978, which is included in Enclosure 1A Appendix 3. The results of these tests are summarized in Table 2 (5) of this application. ([]) Between March 20 and April 2, 1980, a series of tests were performed on the BU-7 transport package. These tests are described in a report dated April 25, 1980, which is included in Enclosure 1 A to this application. Included in these tests were some done sequentially simulating hypothetical accident conditions during transport. A summary of these tests is given in Table 2. Upon completion of the four hypothetical accident condition tests, conducted in the sequence prescribed in 10 CFR 71, the package subjected to all these tests, was opened and inspected. There was no damage to the inner containment sealing features; the original computer weigh cards were with the 5-gallon pails; they were not wet and there was no moisture in the inner container. The top insulation disc was badly charred and the _,~ LICENSE SNM-1097 DATE 1/06/86 PAGE DOCKET 71-9019 REVISION 0 3-5

i i outside of the bolted cover had some blistered paint, -O. but euere ao eruce= ret ae eee ereeca or containment, or loss of shielding. t j E i 4 ? + I o 4 i i i i R 1 'l A 4 P LICENSE SNM-1097 DATE 1/06/86 PAGE DOCKET 71-9019 REVISION O 3-6 j.

1N4BLE 2 SINGLE BU-7 TRANSPORT PACKAGE - ACCIDENT CONDITIONS Requirements

Tests Conducted Results (1) Free Drop. A f ree drop of the (1) Each of the two packages was Both packages impacted at tpecimen through a distance of raised by a crane to a 30 ft.

pre-determined angles. Areas at nine m (30 ft.) onto a flat, height at approximately a 45* points of impact of both units occentially unyielding, horizontal angle. The height was determined were without fracture. Beyond curface, striking the surface in a by a measured, weighed cord this, the only.significant damage position for which maximum damage hanging f rom the containers. A was a slight opening of the cover in expected. quick release mechanism was used where the closure ring of one to drop the packages, which fell package was deformed. The bottom at approximately a 45* angle, corner free-fall test of the outer landing on the corners of the package caused somewhat more package. crushing of the container than was experienced in the top drop. There was no evidence of fractures or separation of the package side from the bottomt therefore, the package with the slight opening due to the top drop was deemed have suf fered the maximum damage.to l F Po s t-te s t inspection showed NO l damaged to the sealing features of! the inner containers or to the 5-gallon pails.

2) Puncture. A free drop of the (2) Both packages were Both packages were slightly specimen through a distance of one free-dropped through a distance of indented about 1/4".

There was no a (40 in.) in a position for which 40", striking the top end of a puncture of either package. atximum damage is expected, onto vertical steel bar mounted on a the upper end of a solid, reinforced concrete pad. The bar vartical, cylindrical, mild steel was fabricated per the bsr mounted on an essentially requirements of 10 CFR 71, unyielding, horizontal surface. Appendix B. Tha bar must be 15 cm (six in.) in dicaeter, with the top horizontal A vertical drop with the container rnd its edge rounded to a radius impacting on the 18 gauge cover of not more than six tm (1/4 in.) near the outer edge was considered rnd of a length as to cause the most vulnerable orientation to maximum damage to the package, but puncture. not less than 20 cm (eight in.) long. The long axis of the bar cust be vertical. (3) Thermal. Exposure of the (3) A thermal test of one of the Inspection of the inner container whole specimen for not less than packages (the one that sustained af ter all the tests showed no 30 minutes to a heat flux not less the most damage from the free-drop damage to the inner container, its thrn that of a radiation through 30 feet) followed the 30 sealing features or to the snvironment of 800*C (1475*F) with foot free-drop and puncture tests. 5-gallon pails that would field an taissivity coefficient of at The thermal test conducted either of them inef fective. The least 0.9. Por purposes of required exposure to an paint was slightly blistered in a calculation, the surface environment of 1475* minimum for a small area at the top end of the

Pursuant to 10 CPR 71.73 f w-U LICENSE SNM-1097 DATE 1/06/86 PAGE DOCKET 71-9019 REVISION O

3-7

TABLE 2 - Continued i ) SINGLE BU-7 TRANSPORT PACKAGE - ACCIDENT CONDITIONS Requirements

Tests Conducted Results cbtorptivity must be either that period of 30 minutes.

Since an inner container, but no indication vclue which the package may be actual gasoline fire with open of this on either of the 5-gallon cxpected to possess if exposed to flames provides the most realistic pails containing UO2 Powder. a fire of 0.8, whichever is means of satisfying the grotter. In addition, when requirements of 10 CFR 70 thermal cig ni f icant, convective heat input test, this method was chosen for Lust be included on the basis of the BU-7 test. Ctill, ambient air at 800*C (1475*F). Artificial cooling must not be applied af ter cessation of Xxtsrnal heat input and any co;bustion of materials of conrtruction must be allowed to proceed until it terminates n turally. The ef fects of sclar r0diation may be neglected prior to, during, and following the t;xt. (4) Immersion-fissile material. (4) After the fire test, the Following immersion as described, For fissile material, in those package was allowed to cool down the package was opened and ettss where water inleakage has for the prescribed period of time, inspected. The inner container not been assumed for criticality and then placed in the water was dry, the silicone rubber knilysis, the specimen must be immersion tank under 3-1/2 feet of gasket was not damaged, and Fmm:rsed under a head of water of water. 120 pounds of weights were analysis of the UO2 Powder showed it least 0.9 m (three ft.) for a attached to the unit to insure there was no significant increase period of not less than eight that it would sink. It remained in the moisture content. hours and in the attitude for submerged for 10 hours. which maximum leakage is sxp;cted. (5) Immersion-all packages. A (5) The BU-7 package was submerged There was no water leakage in the expirate, undamaged specimen must to a depth of 50 feet above the inner container af ter eight hours b2 tubjected to water pressure container for a period of eight of submergence in 50 feet of squivalent to immersion under a

hours, water.

had of water of at least 15 m (50 ft.) for a period of not less than Gight hours. For test purposes, in external pressure of water of 147 kilopascal (21 psi) gauge is considered to meet these conditions.

Pursuant to 10 CFR 71.73 g

LICENSE SNM-1097 DATE 1/06/86 PAGE DOCKET 71-9019 REVISION 0 3-8

3.4 Acceptance Criteria () Acceptance criteria for meeting the requirements of 10 CFR 71 are as follows: o No water intrusion to the contents. o No rupture of the product containers or inner container. o No damage to the inner containment sealing features that would yield them ineffective. o No significant deformation to the outer container that would affect criticality safety considerations. We have concluded, as a result of these tests described above, that all tests required by 10 CFR 71, have been conducted, witnessed by Quality Control Engineering, and have passed the acceptance criteria. Test completion check sheets and compliance certificates are included in Enclosure 1A to this application. v Y\\# LICENSE SNM-1097 DATE 1/06/86 PAGE DOCKET 71-9019 REVISION 0 3-9 ~

4.0 CRITICALITY SAFETY EVALUATION ,e3 %.) 4.1 Uranium Oxides in Powder Form - H/U Ratio 10.45 For the contents described in Sections 2.7.1 and 2.7.2.1 (uranium oxide powder with H/U ratio 10.45), the criticality safety of the BU-7 package is described in -Enclosure 1C to this application, GE Document NEDO-11277, "The General Electric Model BU-7 Uranium Shipping Container - Criticality Safety Analysis". These analysis results demonstrate that for these contents, the BU-7 package can be transported as Fissile Class I, pursuant to the applicable sections of 10 CFR 71. 4.2 Uranium Oxides in Powder Form - H/U Ratio 11.6 & C/U Ratio $1.27 For the contents described in Sections 2.7.1 and 2.7.2.2 (uranium oxide powder with H/U ratio i 1.6 and C/U ratio (} 1 1.27), the criticality safety of the BU-7 package is described in Enclosure 1B to this application. These analyses results demonstrate that the BU-7 package can be transported as Fissile Class I, pursuant to the applicable sections of 10 CFR 71, for these contents. 4.3 Uranium Oxides in Pellet Form For the contents described in Sections 2.7.1 and 2.7.2.3 (uranium oxide pellets), the criticality safety of the BU-7 package is described in Enclosure 1C to this application, GE Document NEDO-11277, "The General Electric Model BU-7 Uranium Shipping Container - Criticality Safety Analysis". These analysis results demonstrate that for these contents, the BU-7 package can be transported as Fissile Class I, pursuant to the applicable sections of 10 CPR 71. LICENSE SNM-1097 DATE 1/06/86 PAGE =- DOCKET 71-9019 REVISION 0 4-1

5.0 PROCEDURAL CONTROLS New containers are inspected prior to first use and used packages are inspected prior to each re-use, in compliance with 10 CFR 71 and with the quality assurance plan submitted to the NRC and approved by the NRC on October 9, 1984, in Quality Assurance Program Approval for Radioactive Material Packages Approval Number 0254, to assure that each of these packages meets the specifications delineated in the applicable NRC Certificate of Compliance and in the supporting documents referenced in this Certificate. Prior to shipment, limits for package loading and proper closure of package are verified. Appropriate internal procedures and instructions have been prepared to accomplish these actions. /~T %-) x LICENSE SNM-1097 DATE 1/06/86 PAGE DOCKET 71-9019 REVISION O 5-1

6.0 BU-7 TRANSPORT PACKAGE DRAWING Specifications for the BU-7 transport package are shown on General Electric Drawing 112D1592, Revision 4. ,_) i7U-LICENSE SNM-1097 DATE 1/06/86 PAGE DOCKET 71-9019 REVISION O 6-1 --,---------y .,-------,-e--- y e-- ____-.---,-_a, o--%.,,.,y -f,- , +,..,-, m-

i, 1,.._1L .~.3 m e er

e 11: e en p a

5. si a 5 :"3 a a ai L e g T

h. 'i

- tj T_ o ! I _w. % e Er .I u _i. s 1' , d.. - 3 M Z.- .4_ 25, Ek 3 = m y jg,W il i w s s=

a: . 'q-v u

/,~T { % ..a u g s sa n; 2 t a -l. M.~::; i 2 s a 3*$ e5E a) =

Iw r-Ilg s v

e g g g 3

z

= 3 : s a a! r-I n n LJ q a -e, g.=,!! gj g. 6j -; J = = m,- s =,. oa g q v-3.: ae ..a - e en a= a~a=X :s;: 3 sI er.s.=s!gdEss y* N 345j m% v

E

. 1*:- -jp E r,;;3== 3 3-5,i 4,. -,i.s a o -

*2<s.s n, m g :r =

s. *s a

r- = a = a a;- a t g

_I

e r k2 -A ,N a 5 3maa-]_ *3 4,,.x d"S a i j.5 B A E,3 3 \\, w 3 = uS5 A. $. s %op: a m a -aa = a = e

i!

2-m. e g/ e _ ;j-v # 7.w .t -!a.- 1.x% m m !. r/, \\ y. p m., = .p aRi A !j u.k b j e 1 i w a m.e ac y S 4. - a -gg= em A s:n bl /t g ? "I! da L Af c

gl yn g -

- - - - -w 5 =

g. s.:

omm. a. . ze e.

- p..

.a-. mg ;u!q gni;n; as e 22 u s, ,a - s s h s= liis c

=>

ai = ls;"lls

Is n

, s. = =N3;;; Ji;, sa s s tv,i af*g - s~ y - E.s =n ns,3'er s = s. 2 a: i i!$ r s.s, - 5.: w.s g' m$.a -nnssa _ m' y,s,. Le Es,s f,~r., a c / m n o s ,/ ,r -,, / v/ b t /j,0 =, a

s. s e,e,

p..

->P. j a, s .,g p / ~ hti .In. m t c / i / ~ / sb "n** "as =- a er : ssa sa 93 r,l a s 'l ja - 73 3ESa ~ ~

==

s=

5. * ;

/\\ m .i r >~ 3- .s

==.,- % Y e4 r. =- . - = ed C h5 N 23,- 2 2 !* N \\.d 4 V + Q xw/ 2 h

~

/5 ( [, '"') ._.,-m ?! 'l i e i u i w i I I 8 a ll o i I

APPLICATION FOR REVISION OF NRC CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE USA /9019/B(_)F FOR THE BU-7 TRANSPORT PACKAGE ENCLOSURE 1A REPORT OF PACKAGE EVALUATION TESTS ,~ ( )) FOR THE BU-7 BULK URANIUM TRANSPORT PACKAGE

f 4 Y' TEST REPORT FOR MODEL BU'7 BULK URANIUM SHIPPING CONTAINER In accordance with criteria for compliance with CFR49,- paragraph 173.398 and 10CFR, paragraphs 71.31, 71.32 71.35 and 71.36 BY John A. Zidak Manager Packaging Engineering General Electric Co. Nuclear Energy Traffic Operation San Jose, California DATE ISSUED April 25, 1980 o Vw

e TEST REPORT FOR MODEL BU-7 BULK URANIUM SHIPPING CCN7AINER h

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 TEST DESCRIPTION 4 1 Normal and Hypothetical accident condition tests were conducted l on General Electric Model BU-7, Bulk Uranium Shipping Containers j 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. j. The BU-7 Container is intended to be a fissile class I shipping 4 container for shipment of enriched uranium powder. q 1.2 PACKAGING DESCRIPTION j Inner containment is a nominal 16-gallon drum closed by a gasketed-j bolted lid, centered and supported within an outer 55-gallon drum I by a solid insulating media, and containing two steel pails which contain U02 (See Drawing ll205231A and Figure 1.) I ] 1.2.1. 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 steel. The closure ring is 12 gauge steel with 5/8" bolt meeting DOT Specification 17H. 1.2.2. Inner Container A nominal 16-gallon drum constructed of 18 gauge steel, l 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 q within the outer container by, and the space between the V t-two drums is completely filled with, solid fire-retardant I phenolic foam per USAEC Specification SP-9.

i .i 1.2.4. Product Container j p' (A Two closed 5-gallon containers fabricated of 24 gauge v steel, vertically stacked in each BU-7 container. ( 1.2.5. Test Weight Each 5-gallon pail contained 45 kgs (99 pounds) of natural UO2 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 k1878). 2.0 TESTING 2.1 TEST

SUMMARY

The test program consisted of a combination of normal and hypothetical accident condition tests as described in 10CFR71 Appendix A and B. i 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 i.ll model BU-7 Containers. Serial numbers and tests they were subjected to is as follows: O(i CONTAINER SERIAt 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 Kl878 Cond tion THERMAL TEST Kl878 WATER IMMERSION TEST Kl878 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 Kl878 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 Q(_ there completion per test check sheets in the Appendix.

e f .y LOADING (- 2.2.1 . Hypothetical Accident Loading ( Containers K0174 and Kl878 were loaded with approximately 45 kilograms (99 pounds) of natural UO2 powder, in the Fuel Mancfacturing Operation (FMO) powder pack facility, using a corrputer controlled loading and accountability system, see figures ( 2 and 3) the computer punch cards rerrained with the 5 gallon pails of powder during the tests. (Loading Record Sheets and Request Sheet are in the Appendix). 2.2.2 Normal Condition Loading Container Serial flo. K0319 was loaded with lead shot weighing 93 Kg's (205 pounds) gross weight. 2.2.3 Moisture Content Moisture content analysis of the natural uranium powder was made before and af ter the Hypothetical accident tests. , 2.3 NORMAL CONDITION TESTS NOT CONDUCTED n The following normal conditions tests were not conducted because d I their requirements have been satisfied for the following reason: ( Heat: Temperatu're of 130 F is within normal operating range for materials of construction. 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 included as Appendix 3.) Vibration: Centainers of this type have withstood years of transport with no occurences of significant damage due to normal vibration.

Corner Drop:

Not required since package weight exceeds 110 pounds. Oc e t '\\

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 ( f 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 co-tainer 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.

3.2 Hypothetical Accident Condition Tests 1 The hypothetical accident condition tests were conducted /' (- b 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 Kl878 and K0174 were selected at random, then one (kl878 was dropped on its top closure ring and the other (Serial No. 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 Kl878 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 4 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 Both containers impacted at the pre-determined angles. (n( Areas at points of impact of both units were without f j fracture. Beyond this, the only significant damage was A 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 botton 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 siight 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 pail s. 3.3.2 PUNCTURE TEST Containers K-1878 and K-0174 were free dropped through a (1 stance 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 Cc b gauge cover near the outer edge was considered the most vulnerable orientation to puncture.

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 (V (y above the surface allowed 'for approximately 2 feet of flames ( around all sides of the container. By using the open gasoline A 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 temperature of 2000 F. being reached. The full O(- fire test coatiaued for 42 iautes 6"raia9 3oo e gallons of fuel during that period.

3.2.3.1 Test Procedure (cont.) RESULTS Inspection of the inner container after c 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 UO2 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 silicone rubber gasket was not damaged, and analysis of the (d 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 tests, conducted the sequence prescribed in 10CFR71 container Serial No. Kl878 was opened and inspected. As prevIously mentioned, there was no damage to the inner containment 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 insulatfor. 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 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. y

4 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. OC ( l e Ol t=

5/16" ST. BOLTS (QUANTITY OF 12) 3/16" THK. STL. LID PHErl0LIC FOAM INSl'LATION GH EMP RESISTANCj FIRE RET. F0AM PER USAEC Q(-- SPEC. SP 9.5 LB/CU.FT. 16 GAL 18 GA STL. DRUM 13.75 DI A t' b m c ,]b 27 = s \\. h. [ gg {. s% Q( ( e PLUG-PHENOLIC F0Aff '~ FIRE RET. F0A!! PER USAEC SPEC. SP 20 LB/CU. FT. 5 GAL STEEL PAIL 2 PAILS PER DRUM CONTAIN 002 C0VER - FLAT 18 GA. STL. a. 55 GAL 18 GA. STL. DRUM ~ -CLOSURE RING 22.82" DIA. X 36.5" HIGH 12 GA. STL llITH 5/8 BOLTS MEETIrlG 00T SPEC.17H FIGURE 1 BU-7 CONTAINER O! t=

LIST OF FIGURES 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. Kl878 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 DIAL-0 TROLL SHOWING TEMPERATURE READING DURING THERMAL 34. WATER IMMERSION TEST 35. POST TEST INSPECTION 36. POST TEST INSPECTION (]}( 37. POST TEST INSPECTION 38. POST TEST INSPECTION 39. CHARRED INSULATION DISC 40. CONTAINEFS AFTER COMPLETION

---m u.,. --,--A.a -ah __a,___A.. Af . gr l ' lg "k e.;_,....... t [, a;, g O( J 'k g c r 9 fj ~ Y

.e h

ez,ct.., 00 ,,,,i), 'h e 1 ? a 4 1 \\ \\ \\ O( F1euRE 3 0ADigs 5 G A L- "^

_m a mk ,m_., .-.4 m a. a e-

/

A N 1, 1. O( i c / / / a ) C. 2 N a . ?

.y Q',

Ol C C C {(l,_l g c a j.p u __ 3, n LL.l ~ lik, [Ill- 'o y,s..; 1 e I ( ,,.....+.~.n. f ( o cad,_n1 e m e

( l i I h t- $i e EW' ' g .Y. e. 5 3 3.% .i , o e o,.. e., yw I a j.l I h Y& \\ oc M 9 ( ZC-25~-I i'

\\ >.... -

s. % ~ * * .r. - _.. y. - u: -:: ' ; c&...s'-

.3:..?:

....,.T. - -_. :.c n. q g ;.-:. r.;,:.; g : :..- c. %,=. .?.;;;j.m R.6 y'.~:: '- ...g; -29.

c'

. >. -i.e -..2c-r:.? .o y, n .: p .sg:p.~..% K':md..n ;'.4g&~~g..y3;.~ 4 % .,>.. w. j- - ;, y' " -~.' -4.. :s. ~

t. ' m

~ .c. F I G ll P E I! (1 0 R f1 A L C 0 f1 D I T I 0 il WATER S PAY TEST O(. g

k o-l} 'I

1

+ 3 ge, / l i' ' ( a; y j 4 31 n;' ) 1 jii:l , M+.- n j 3.r.. p ;( 4 ~ s &.).. I s g: ' /. 5L'--13.l .d as O( r? l i l l ,/ .y .c. F1GURE 5 O f' E ll 0 R M A L C 0 fl 0 I T 1 0 t1 4 F00T DROD TEST

mm y.......,.,

S~. pr 8' w

f..2Q:5-.,% '.,?' ',ff. :u,:)n:u:1

1

\\ u 1 ~ s..;. :.s 1 5 f-5 5.- -5 f,' yen. 55? "1 V' 2 O ' 5E' QTh l-\\,J. 2

== ./.< - :s ,:o. T_ y a 1 e-.q:: m I U) a L._ __ a rm a,, s w PEE m 2 %.i ' z 'd '- - c_ g

x n

'.fQ; ~ .. b. ~,__.. I.}.~ \\, 1 F QRy~q pg = i* ~ .l. y x;.<yu.. \\ l <;r.xy,x.%.x_x.,, y ^ f g ..y,.. a v.-....,. g 7 0 --~ t ---- ? Fe-b y- ~. - }. y?y ~. <.'.a

, s * < 'y,, ~e _ ; t ry, ' ',,--. m...._3 em fp -

A' e : C Z ,. l !~ '"; S U T ~L.' m Hk b; i C,.y OC m c 'c w[s x.wg = ~ ,? I.: E! fe,.,1 D ,.ll fy p. .?' [ I O K I 1,p. < g, ; F.-- e

g y-l s

LL_ W j.- 4 ,ge j4 s

7t:

w g

Er j

t W <m s.m s. - a e o-3 = f 4 g c j g = + 'J l _. - -lk.:fj t ~~~ C.,-, r' pi "8 'x..:( !!'E

f.

1 4 O i 'c C

z 1_?l 0( . : pg+..,.,: h ( . n *. ~?i.l ,,N i; s ' '?\\ ;.. ', =... ' 's s, ny;;;g n - ,. 1 .; a j:. _ a+.: py; , q., : -. rs. 7:_ ^- :-: + ~~_

8; x

.;,;g. ',. g_

y

. g.. .y. 3 s i J. f.j. a. '.3.h !,., ., x'. m.'w ' y,,, n,, x_..,, ~' ~~'**C.- i 3 a,;.

.r.... n

.c; 7, y. ,~ v,,y . a.

,u.::,

,(

. t

- - Q..'

c} ',

937 ., ; j, l +~'fe (;i. j ;I fu.,+ ,.,s c,,,... < ~,. !h _ l- .s<;)' ' ';s ' N;: e s e , b,s ' .j.. J^ -y p, .i 4 6 H i. t P OC i ( i i i t ..i. I, f I l f y 'p! -f c 6_ I i .p - I = m'4 ,*y ' . l U ?,-.. d, i d't. I., - y.' 4 yp. d s,, e 3 :' :t -w .:p a. v;p; % g. t: s-m g. r ., %ja..;T' y. ,h. dU , W $, J 5 g-. ..., r i a [ y a M 1 g g ..J } gggp; ~C ..,g j ANY = db '[ .2 N ~ FIGURE 7 30 F00T 0P0P TEST

Oc c \\ r s y t i i b k 1 { / 'L ( OC ..c ,ji t q,: , -j . fl.: .3 ' k :: v;. I a [..'9~: f v -9 EQ [1 i; 1.,, c '. g 7w I h .aig pm; i i i 4 fl;:,3;4T **'e_a '~' gg V w:.y n

-).f

'x s n).2 w n 'k

?

s M !j rw 2 s y ,9.. u.c _.=_ n y.- ^' ' y , _..,,),.. u- ~m m- ~; p >.i

4wl

'$,M 4 OL E ~ g i c, u n e 8 C0NTAINER N 0. K0174 I M P /\\ C T I N G ON THE B0TTOM C0RNFR

_y .s . : n,; %. %. ?w.:; -o 4 ' -..,u n: :.g:s f/h'g j,. c, ( .. y .= c. .i i x 'f 1 L:: i -5 .f l * .,7,' l ~f y.J t ~'j-

>j t q.aa

,s ge j-J %, s, e J ,4 +4

f;

'k ?i r,...,. p;;;>,pme w ,s, a y,- I - f g ;,, .r 'd * #

- = ~.

t.

- c-

s

ryJ

l,

^ - Q4: r" j OC M - n "C l ( .b h3 "% y 'e "'s TQ i N 2 t 2 t i ] -[ e6 l - - vm; &@f=urt ty Ifed, z._?hane;g ,o ~ e.w q .,..g w z : m 2i Y s '- i ) yy,>; - ' % &- ifl'.'l} F I G 11 R E 9 i C 0 il T A l il E R fl 0. K 187P, I M P li C T I N G D il THE CLOSURE RING

> rh$d!KWejg$,hNk[ gg ..' ;, h., s. nL : c:x n.,.en aG wa

~-,.

. y ' N, l .r$ lp 5 f sh? a g'? X*N ~ 4 a jy;Q-y\\ r J, g ' h$b s,f.f$j[h h? [ f,4 e,[. I ( s. . a. aq . e,.. 4A3 w <c. +,. g,yggdyu 1. i g l ,4 n - gg . ww r. tb - \\ .s , "A n

a. 1sjt-unc

,rq s t y ~7 y .c ? )![? p $l. GlAkqEiQ?05fh* ICES [!{_ sg wa b '- yi !: r.

,, )

(f AR"?' ' W E ]l & f O k if L,g.Wggj$11M;h.pi5" wtst j 9 F-r p#u,gpP$nypu. g b k),; l / ? u \\.. w/9 e y a' z..

'j%. ab. _.

-'f;.

e r,

I 5 . a g # g %y . '({ g; *hf$ [ [ f./ s [' ) ji e c u 2 i \\ c@ v M i L p:::v r @~. sw2Wug gLst.gm

esar, q

x ssJ - &,p g 3ycyg g g m i 3 I ~ h ti,k h;fb h!fbhh $ i M h lf h k h- [) $ \\ w! i N ~ D,,i. . a b ,C 00 , i r e' ; s..w.. y s" y g 4

-n 0

N ,h! ' NJ ' I ~ kn n d, l,> i a ~ qat p g 1 t i l f,l ,%l { if e ,z c~w>-,. m av at .e d[ h Ij d j

1 now "U

!TS .My$. . 3%p ' .n Y /Q { x y 1N 3-A ? w 7, JM,, ~ s y, t x 'V 8&3

6 h I g dslei $@i?a m.. W9mj lG Z R '.h,u.,p'$,f%,(;y{5'ylgxk 5'# n ~ _~= jj. n9

, )

s (p~g.?q[gme.+w,ef[;k"e~

n.,.,

s. a k) *i y~.z'. y 4 G, N

^ l$wn%g[~ ;. a ln L m nQ j q g f'. . v:A k H .WMr h eg;. ) sltjl u ~ jj } l ff - i n v D v: g 7.- ,an it u - 1 5-i y m =g g ~ a c, . gy Y+: Y~ scs x. o w a n w M' L, Y b CO ~ - - o

3. y r,:

, < h jI3 O C 1 ~~ k I'8, ' QQ*e; ' *BQC p u_ ~ N '.L ' 7 l z 3t u l ~ i.r = \\ w s\\' '4 e w r.3 )g L I 'I t ij hQ lik..

I u, 7 g' , m 8%c..,gg, *. a g., A ,: a.p.-sy +l 3 . 7 M u ~ f g '~; 9 9 %, y\\' k 1,n '?

'f S'.T.. w,,a$h-. ymer l !,,

g Q J E j / y g i, $ f... Q}lpgffpiy Q / ~'; _ p;; ; 4 yp a_ + '; ~ n, 't.! .. n v. m u .4 ../; u_ 3 .m ~., _ 2_. f.!l;gl 1.[f_)Ed-f=n:

w wI r n.4. 2. n u r a,/< j -

s = +3 3_g.w.; p. ~ <C F ~ ze d uJ I il j\\ .t ) -:J'.l

f 2-

,5 ~, ' lg\\ ' 'l-} ',{ )., - .' j

E b A.,.,V.5.' ;. r'.,.'.. r.. y $.,V,fy...-\\,;\\; r>+.7 4,y... n, ..:- h, c f. W, 4. ... 4 *n.t* <n -r y.. f/ r-w. '1;, * & % f ,.*%..r, g. e,. m 3 e. t ' k' %%, ~i, J,%,..., 9Q. f. ;:.:.p..p.K !, <w.P p., c., p.f.. W a..pj g,

peau 4,.,....<,.',.

m f . n,s...;... 9py . n, r.. ~..za , : 4.p.r.f J.,. ;.:p.. gs$.,s. p s. < g. 4 _,,*..W...> , a. : -,. 91 .o s s.. -., s 3 .s.. f, ,,.k'c N ~

s... jfh. ~!:.,.,' #,b, y.v

?'b$ L i ,. m. p Ms:.e [t w j,1, p ; ')..>4)..g.'I ;

i. b id.f'S;-e.

~ %NN;O).1 y5,(7/jy... 2: C',/ F - 4 o ,, C y

y.,.;s.,.

. m.... n.. . g. w g.e, :.w. .. wz. s,.g%,s%..f., g,,. ai, - ' L ' a. 3.j m = i' x La y '.... ' ,p, . r...a.. M*T K-,Q f ft- .Y e t, w - gl m, 3 -E

;........g;.

n ( <y y

r, 0(

= y; q- . q. < ~ ~..'- 4 ~,,, . wy 1 n = { .~Tl e i x., y 5' h g )g at W.< f4 f ,3.) p g \\ Q W. ~ ~

3., y m

32L g.... dsJ l ,3 W. R E T Y k E #,.,3,4, 4S. [ .~)~'t '4 /. Mg e f. ,,e." 'e'. = w-y 1,. h, 3,.. , ' f./.Li' ~, #,.?' ~ 7 E j .$7 'f'[y ;p. :c :- cN.Q.0{g.:.T@vk@) g f. *. -. (. J.,,, -M / .w.v..

- ' 3. e *,',3)

Jky> ;.f '~- U Jj i. % g-ss . _kh;h$TNfW j$ ~ " ~ p

' N '

d k.gl$ pdi.{g\\ r / ~ p F

+9h & W s %.g: &, :$ & c l;l g.)'..

r. r

1 f *i 4 ; ;;t.:. $&%g$en&y.hihy' 3* '. h* l:.*, l": [ f f.,'hb jhh i Q + v . m.,n a wp ,.1, a.. ...gfi. s?.,< m,,., N ~ t'/ &,, C) ',", h.:; l,'cf:h,. + 51. - (

ry 3

i a , <,s t.4 l l t,q*)gh..[ ; J N., g.) .. w, .,~.e.. '~ , p*

j. e r. =l\\

.{ /, ' .,- : y,'., r N.f e-2 'Y$. .... g g

.,',f-s

._3 - ll r.h '.* ' ' \\ %s' , : :,. 4 e-,,, -,+ s. ' ", i '-j, [ f.,i., [,I h,}, / \\';]4; l '9X 7.y l y ...<...,. s,. .yz v. p, 1 s r . Q_ ;. l .'s , 7;.,; y. y Q _ - g ~' .i :r '.. ..o. -- u ..'.c. ~ t 7; ,1 ...s s g c,. O.. ,a g-4 jt J: f.Q e ,;y;;y )Q, k =r u-

.3

, w%,g, %g I, s,. .37 u %<. - g*, y 4 m V\\

k'. '

.,g- .o ;. i .? b'. ,,..e ig .s'y...C ~ N,N, ~. r. cc ..! (( p

h%yg C

i, i' 4. /s 4 y, -u e b

s. %

e)**,.,..,, "' - 1 A ' r. e... f.[~.e#.' ~' - x a .I l 'M, ', (#~ J.[ :l,,. c; . ee,,e"'w?&,y.

x v.;.,l {jN, 1*..

= + y s $} NN f>f. i t og' h,, *\\ ~'G:. g,Q a

te -

[ Y'.. .g . i s..n:Ag% . s' ' w... ~ m OIf',

if ?f W

7" 't e, ' I (/) A I I l\\'lsd',N,N 'l.', <;..- I' i Ih j% i

g' h K h'

?*. i- )g .4,. i; '. g w. Il -n-,

M yl T li! Sh a, e r.%v,Q ' $s x . % v. r', - J>,. / ~ 2 ~? gt. e,- [~ gfN :{ ...v- ~ d c ,1 Y 'd l,, a w h', [h. 's a 1 , /pn i a a b f i j'% '%[$$fsg E&$ h h -l ; a W (. (' 3 4 4 P W M s $ u$g y$s Ti a 4 z q vgwp /ggesg

e

'ff Q 9gRTi!B5igQ%%Q j: O )e y d u w M?:,%h5h. w; :,m a,s ,h e. rtar,.og n . i.- N '. ih{ a ym o p. n N,, 7L g ')g, )( y- .s ' M y pmur ', g s,,3 , 4. y y+m. ll s\\ ,j g a [$;5[ u k. $[$n WIki(( '/ t if$[. yqAl{F%d;FI)! Yd f c u a: ' a gN.; w q % p ? % x . ?.h ge o t a; .v ,p n Ql."ny% 6 [ tg' 'k?rh.'N }{M19.JlY ~ a " w. ' %.. S m.z? M. u $W ]e yg.... m. 5,

O

N 4-3.

g/ a $w% U J. e ~ g. . w. s y ; j g' 'f 1 e .g7.( y ~ .b' ( ~

c.fl4&J.a]g~

~gl E,Qy - ,t l \\ i \\ aS 3 e 7 ;,, f. [.p {r W-F - qy3 )~ .'g j - ?+ . ~2 ' _w # h. 4 s~- 9 , y-c-y /. J.. h. w C j ;:. g+ g ' g Q ~ . 2 J:n. :fm} j>s P 's, \\..\\.. -{ [ O ? f hg g. " Ai . 4.,g.,o ( R ly N ./. _. D .f N _ ~. l. - [_ M l. ~ h fs g' e' F pt T J W ;,gQM ~ l 0 ? f. 0

7. ~~.1.

' "i v R ,g7 CW

s. -

( m 4@ gr, 0 y-J 3 d?[... pWy ,, g.

i'

'\\ s g. ? 0 .f a 1 , Ms S 6 Q;". L5 -%m.7%h,.ng.fpA vG. 1 R .Y s -,'. :, ~ y, f Qr. j E s.

3. n (; p E

.A .. 2. 7 Ou T w.r

p R

Q:, -(. . g

.x'M

';r#: ., p;. f.

{'

F - s, U P,* A ,]M.3_ C b 4 ,n x [4.@j, Np$ c h-s M, ,. 4 .. ' y. I ,y 4 i 'l. F 7

I 1

- /)

g k.. ;. "'y 5 ~. 0 ?- K . Wyf' ,5 /, aF = O ~ yy . ::. ', dg. ym. ,r N ^ q::ffn.g LX.4.g3 e , 3. '.. .l% - hy Ji !Wk R .[ ,h N := n WT I E $ $~.,Y t' .'t. -Q:- ,-.s s;% l N l 'j Sj ; &y% . ~

g, I

A 3, r,'s ;.. i g sQL ?- T ~ p 3 . j.gs. r e N O yp[~;. i. s.9 %~

s, C

vG a 7 il l

Je 5~~-- ~ l ~- .f nauon I g 4 d. i r $1 - , %g .l ~, sg we ~ )gl 1 cw... flr - ? 1 g r .r ( I$ EbLai>w: ka r iO',4h 7J,il$ir 'C fp.,. l 4.u. I1

4 hk t,m

_ y_g. ' -_ - ~, i ~j se::>- L w. J FIGURE 17 CONTAINERS K-1878 AND K- 0174 00 RING PUflCTURE TEST

l e e e ptM*/. n-c jtw h ] \\ ~ ~ e.. .\\ kSd%s" ?x 3. 4., res g x)1 j' o T e - / /4 F 2 j f'*,/ .o C m. u d Q . i w. 9

3. 9* i, sw

\\ 1 s s )y t' .yM, f.%; ) x w w 6 s I y o i w c:. a s.a. ,..opy,7;9... a o J :, s - ' :a l. t %$%s

[, I g

4% } 1, N.' p. ^, ,, :. (w' 7 s . c1 x ~ = 'w Y w' e p, 1, r 's, a \\ \\"5-yp y \\. = 4 o z O \\ \\ i _, ~, - - - _ _., _. - _, _ _. - _ -.,. __.__,_,.m.

y ,g .r 4 s, %u ; .',~s.T 'y. q

j,.

\\. o,[ s* %;

v. ::y s, '

\\, n 4 i $l g '\\ y* 1 s ,j ,g' '. '1 - *];f,hT?l~,*{b5 + c, r

J;jW h

.. ". Q

E! @: g... - %., \\,

y /* , gk -QL, l g .s . aLW. v\\ r \\ n,. m. .,;c "..,. 2 1 }&, g i .,a n [lm;fh \\ cc e i 4 ,[f'd i V m3 C ..a , ia Jk

w 4

p .. s e.n f. ~ f W: to - (( i f[' , O' g LL- 'i.h,. te m n p 4 e. s) g ~ i 2 hs N's,We A 3 \\ \\ e g s i ' W;;,S. s s s s.M}dnN5%_ $h">f. f S $$hf[ .S, %; Qj$}d$sfhS w~ f } 3 k "c:aienvrm'" p,m25S: Y< c (*1 ~ w}<l. 'j * %w j ~' j}d^[b qy d E+ d< y "y . m?qtn;y[)::nQ T, )O 5 sw 3,: . pi:yWs:

s. e -

.?. n-s s ,f/ ,/' s#'

GASOLINE FUEL SUUP.Ct cq WATER IMMERSION ADJUSTABLE TEST TANi( ~ SHUT OFF VALVE MIN FOR BU-7 CONTAINER 300 u a' GAL. 3 S0h N i WATER SUPPLY q ) (GRAVITY FLOW) h,VIT TEST L THERMOCOUPLE j CONTAINER READOUT / INSTRUMENT B U-7 ~~ SUPPORT \\ L. } \\ \\ WATER TANK SUPPLY THERMOCOUPLE WIRE THERM 0 COUPLE l-WAY VALVE STEEL BURN TANK (UNDER WATER LEVEL) 8FT. X 8FT. 1 FT. DEEP FIGURE 20 T 'd E R M A L TEST SETUP O e e/

i'ii 5.~ " Q,W T. N. 7 rWKVJ ' ~. I y J !l;"'7.. " 's ' l. ' T ' :, . h; ' .t. ') $ I : i'..h',. NI. ' \\)'! ~ ' j,.. G+'. ) ItQ. .Vib Ok 6.f., ;.>.t < r,e;'ky 'r .ic k','j,k.9.\\y..p.i',.f.j[0))l.I'-(l* pl A,.,, e..t - , (~ : c

,se

.).- ??S l 1,'. i h ;.. ' y; rjt1)A '. y %..gy + t.,0,, s

2.: -@.

- ~. ~,. s ;, .{, y F"M].,f. ' Y, [?,?(y,! $.ji,h.,z: ' ). f s ' 1:t *.. t i: l,. e .dw.[g.;.

I '>

p.s b{ i i' ::, j. ".,, '.. I *

a. s s

,D.Q..-5 l Il }iG -f Il jf l) }'f:',';*{.:p" ;;;;;it 't 'f'J H ;,.. J~ W i. --) h 'F } *t*j.. })i irt M: ..N ,9 ,$y.y,j,1-[r. i f ; p' 3, . -u '.!:e i* h I >h 1, nl(tl, I. 4. %;; W' < t v. -g y;,;.h,q 4 't. s-Z 2,'. h 3.1 L M .? ]5 ;').,.,,-4 '*,;..; l,'. >? .., e .\\ 1 a .~r .\\ 'l l!J/ p.h

*,i

+

ll (#,f f:.7 '/,,. "

,# y,' l... ' I

4. ' : ; ', '

s. ts ' y,g. ,,.h iy i,, , J(y ',. s '.y

, 4 7-

? i W - i.w -( $k .\\ < f { 8::f y.1..*:' ' ;,o r ~ .,.ic' 5 i.,'Q,. p,. ,;1 /_.,. w ggg f w [.

. ' h'

.1 ' fh) .'.;'h, i,,P.. [?:t JhI k s.,h's. a..; 3, s;;'i,', m ,i. 3(, 1.,

m W.;.

d / p x.. n.. .. b' - o ,,,,, 9.. g. i,$U ( "'I$8.. 'J T Ii t, ..f.;.g.hp,i n '-. <. }*.,. : l .!h l; a 2 l - r~?a ~.;b qh 4:.$] '!. [ '( <', ' o i ?.'l.,{. u,' ! t.p ;. i., ' i l, J ', s. 4 L.* , i, o ',' i., .. ~... i:.!.Q.:1,k),. o i ~' ( t..,- y' '. P ', fd q ) f, V f.,, f '{P,f. (,q. i = s. "., Mi

.0

.'i/ p ,Vi;"'/?bJ,:' ~vi' O.. r u. 6:. ; f;(n,q., yy.l1.. i .]. ]' y 3g, t, ~ - ~y ' ' 1 t i 7 ,J Y !,l :". !., j "y$v.:ij r,h,q.h. o e : .\\ ..e% -.r /,.I e! i l '. m,P,.j ?? c i i ~ q n1.t4 g I c. ~ f. (@. ,i v % q p. h' ; ;,'.~ A n,.. u f. l/i ,ii w i e.;. \\. l' ;.. .n. x ][:.;.I,0,,f..',f,..,', L j .j i d.:.- M h,'m: O .,m iJy-II, a m)?d.'",f ,i j. u f,e C,.; 8:: U $ i,3. f a a ' . :::>y i u. h 2?h l ' N '. ?

_... ~ _ -.. - l 1 a i 'I 'l L t l 4,. 4 N' o g- ~ .e

s. 5 I

I 4* t t _.3 ^ j&T}{$m. TWp-==~".-* -t

^

4WS .4 . -~= - I ' #,. b - a a ? s,_ .z.... \\ 5.U.a.k W '. 4 #-. *[j - e <- - .e* g %. e, .e . <=3

'~

_- ~~ x.a -,. xr < w -p.r -ps.. - --

~..

sw*- ~ ~.., .n: s,* e T.'.*E W 4 + '~.. f $4~4*L ~ , * * * " " ' -n p - ~.,.$.d. s .~,,a. r p, s-- .. ~ .--b'" ) ,v e --- -g w *,.arW, ALsh" . a ;, ". -/

*s M.1"

~, * ^e=*, B'. p,,

r==
2_
4 a

l .. v. :" TS?q 7 a.. ( -y; & g &% "."... ~ ,,e r, yr_. *

y, o **

r-e. e. f n ;. p}-} Q E 22 TEST e THEurgL g 6 _ _,, _ _ - - - - - ^

W' y\\'j;{\\ y s,;. %)j' 7{ Q y(( 1 i t h 7 \\ 9' r; f. ~ \\ \\ . s \\ 1 t v l' \\ i O 'l i g ,/-' --~ /-

- 3 T $y U.t q p%$,... g 7' i f.p! ls)d .~ t t.. .3 . 1 ~

(

s\\ :\\n'f p n v J g a ,\\ ~ .j <j h ~ ~ * )d{ng;; i F.! f, 5 $Y !?p i

g...,s, w

}ai n n, r (tt } s s' s .s _ hi 4 w h -o gp n.r -r.

- > ; (

.\\ .p t}, 4,. ~ 4Sl y a 3i \\ '\\ b g , p rb( l ~', 2-S., a. y. r, p W W ti f {, l z 8 ~ t

MA kj g

,.tc i 1 Um w s hh y . a .t m L,,, s .' i.{ [, a $m$rlE [ Il y- ..[3 i ny, Q.k M I i " r (- 3 lm fk i? f e

w,f A;,v 3. %

9 m O t I,. { s a ll,k, 1 l

U N ' % $'"p U[U,,s.42,.;f.. {, y&...* ' ' I

q. -

c' g, p v bgR O f M. .g .;-[9..'

T,

( O 7M., ~ ~, ,. ; ' f " ' ~.;.. - a ,. j ? {D.*:: y.. Lissa.. ~ =m e* J '. _h_ f,%- - ,.i j,, ' ^ ~ ~ ~ -M -D,"$- (,hh --,,- ' ~- , ?> An*$ ?'% @r,~::.,_;. ;.?Cy ' ^ +%.: " * :,7 ' '. ~ un.

yy,^,,

~ :. - 5;),'~ -- ~%U'*$. ,_s..

O(

n.# { k '# I <t l e.* e-s 6 t ~ > ~.,.. -w y + -.- p g **_ ~ 2 " %f- '^..'.-n.,, pur ".==/.~

- I

,*'L 'T.., hi* .r.k ~M A. 2 ......~ -:- w_ _ m -- O t$[.=~ u&w. W'g.=(u.,. -~ )*. Jr. L .u S.f W M ?d M 5 %T&(... e = - -%s..::

,a,,.'

AW m.

/. W- _g M HQ: N:'p f pi'a, -5 - g 77:(, *"l >%$ggq.jh 4* r.' ~;.',E w Bkt%KiDM l. . - - -. -.., - - - - ~ - - -~

1 O C t 4-z=vv~ ~ ~ .s, w ~* w %,e ~' & _c'? ".-%, _ >,1LV'* - a pc's . s.

495'egQ.....r.15 t'O$$f.?$6.:-9=-!l?w 'i s.

3 . - - ~ -. --

EAYS5hb W-n...

/ ,e ..qdM g, ge,y. ' l,,,. I j OC T 1 1 1 1 1 s ( 'k -~ L..,.,'

;v

-.~ m c ~s " 4fgti . h% w ' '" ' - r:..cD;** =

.%Lsn' -

,.:.*V.,..:. 4'. \\ ~. ^~- ~ v.. r.,X;p.s, - .N -~ s. y.. . v 4.- a. .s O {i _ g J, p. 9 e ,0$b F 1 G U R E 26 T H E p. F A L TEST

l. - -

' O( f,. e y' A on : l } l 1 11 ga ~. _,. 34W: F$.. '.';M's.a.- -awgM- ~..- '. =. w. m %.. y.

-. _ r...h g

} Q f _ u '~~' g. ~,,. l -,j eg_- ,g;. r e.7,+ . J '. 'pff._ M. ^. ;.. : p j ~ - i s.g, ,g.. l O (.n, >,, D..: ;p.~, l ,X ' d: f c. s- -,,,,1 ,. d 3 s -a ~t3,v.wa..g;.a.n.=.a:.:m ; - :-- ~ ... ~.. _ l -m..- m.v.,,. .D

' T*

-p. age 'fc'

d*,

? ?- . ~. I ~ l E..;

n. e :.w..~> ;, a*
~: ' ',; v. ;.,.,;...

km, F ~ 3.;;.,.3..7,97 p-Q_.wg, s. d.m ~ -

n. 1 +.- n.7,,.s,..

O (,

4.., -

.t,m. ~ p s v., g i._.. y,s.n. < FIGURE 27 THEPMAL TEST l 1 ..,,.--,.,--,,.--,,,--,n._,...,,. ---,..---..-.-.---..c.

O( w . tr. - '., ' s.

v..

,. s ' 'Qt,r'.' . r ...,i v< .y I i i"s v, t 4. ,s, k \\ a f O( I 4 e, ' .s-Q l ~ ~ a-mg. w..... s.. - ~~L'*.,==* H. f ' ';*

Y T

_L- ^ Q i n @ " m 1 p y '.<? .. v g tj ( m YUW .. 5

on~d." E @

~ s +.r ' 1 $-?,*;E*}.\\y; Q '.Y':'.,, . [*. 3 %' b. ,,)* 'f 1

~.y y*

,f

e K,;
s.f,f & * '

J' x

.,s y.

I,, ** g* t;=gg.',,s.66T %g ~;.g

c :*5: ph ",,

at -G,s,.Rh' 4'5 f *b ?*SJ =Y' *j's'.)Os ' ~ .<. Y, f*. 4:. ; .# ~~ . ppa Q'#. s*.,, r e. _Q. pj V,"

1 FIGURE 28 THERMAL TEST l OL l

l l l

K n E_ d y li )!.,.. } rf l 5 t ,y i E + f l .j o., ..s g l _L.; ..v.e- . t-:-g -. _} ~ W. ? 9 F R..i T. g - ~., ~....-- i <4^ ;.f -. L - -y..

., ;* ^

%':k..~ 7 '. ~:... :.~.,. a.m :.

- =. ...., W *y,3 &. m !r ~ sw%. 2~. ~ . -,@.f %Q.> -%.. 9 -c-~ ~ d'A '. *. r,:. 0 W b . My,?j i n o..M rCh M.?" "~ =_ 5 hp F I G.U R E 29 THERMAL TEST ^

1 'N k ',f l ) g Oc . j y;l 4 e s Q{".c.g:.'g) 4 E u 1 .p. v . : ;g. z'-[ b \\. ', '. ' j, j s l l L'j 0 g .Ji.h.~.L$3' ,[g I,; >;p:

w.

3 I

f..

f l i,,.,j 4 [; ~ 't w 4 a,- t : .rt, W, L i: 1., c ; !,e a I: I. i

=

l f. e t i -i p 1 ;4';.. 3: < h5. = 1. '} ) .Yk $'b.-__ l } ,y[ h;1 1 %. g p &$jpD Jy c M. at ly.t v n

,,y.

^$ v, A l

~ -aa ,Y M O e -4 h k e e '4k y'. 1 r h' 1, g n s- \\ 3 \\ \\ 'N:e s s \\ \\,' y [ \\

A

.~ ; } ' / ',-- ..... h:)g6Chd. \\ a f M,- h. m s* *.L,, ; Q W w ; ?- - s ",e. ^4 y.. .) /

fb,A L

.m,, ~ Y,.. u' 9 4, v. )' L r&..,,i' :' : 8 7 -,' 9..

.h 1

, f >;s !.*~q j -- f. [' c,. f..g f

.* y, r...

'4 T',y. 3,. (., h M,;..Y;y,g.M. y...Qf ,. p

y.e q

j/.~ .. >: },... Ar

y ),, ['. y. v.-

",.;..].- - (g *,., ~- s d i .'p5 * 's,q( 9' 2'i-L , ~ f q ,~, tv,_f.fyy$% .+ g . cg'? : t . ).'~ .7 . -.3 . s#v, ~ 'i. ;, 2, 6-O $Q. N!* pa"*, ' p it' ' g

r* w' y '

p .- d' j.y$,J:' A g-r , ~.,. y/: %,,,.. x ,a ~.gl' a gO 9 s \\\\ E s i \\\\ ' l 1

-- ~_... _ _ - -. - - - ~'- - ~..~.,,, ~ ^~ b

\\

s ;. m N-r.~. 5 E ' f 9' '. * . - ~ u.syp m,c, O(. \\* bb N .,i,t 4, q-n ..:..-. m.: t e b }. s a 4 x.** 7 ,/ e ~l g g -j p -ff.;' - '{ g g I' . t 4.......... ' 9 s;..: 1 d-c nw=w, ':-i;g g*:m us O w s.,r. LE4'm .3. a =. '^ m - 1-q I J ,,s W .+ g . -W + r' 1 .. ~ ~ ( sis.w W* * .A

;;].

b) u i O( t o. < q"Wr...

- t r. '.

3 M00 e ..h ~ p st"n'~. f % %, 3 ? s s \\ i t : l 8 w o j.

i}&

T

i

,h ctp ....'aiii y1 l e ee f. t \\ ,'WO 0 g .. n, . g.; .;~ ~ ~. , s ?. s-s -w s

- - I 4 04 5l.7,'.'. l'} f y' f y L e3:!',9gq;

'.:..l,1:.uT;[.b.iq.:,q&l~Qjf Ste

g n v. n.: . en ;;p.i

..>. n; n - m.. w.-,.me.., p<...,.;!. . - n: ... a Mc W.'.;. _:.c m .*2. ._s L, FIGURE 32 H0ftEYWELL DIAL 0 TROLL SliOWit4G TEMPERATURE READittG DURiflG THERMAL

1 ,,,, ~ ' PCWit ,- + -6ao y G 0..,,,,18 h. Oc v# p.... 8g. 'oo, g 1 e s ) i, o J O o 00 g D' -{e-U I 1 % 'd i u. h O e ee 4, .%,gg,,,,,,,,,, e O i . :..,,,,,,',0,,,,sa o p W =fma- ? 5 1 ? 8 ..{ y r % b&ll ......,n. 'i 7,' c 5, h$$ s 5. 43 ~ l[, +g7, -- ' t m OL i n, e' c. n_! FIG. 33 H0flEYWELL DIAL 0 TROLL SHOWItiG TEMP. R E A DIllGS DURING THERMAL TEST

g. ~ ~~ N 4 i 7 p ~ \\,9 f D 'fi.1:p r f ;,.$b.h ' 'N.k.y.'N: 'kg3 ,i se...

c

,.::.fi ' ? .s 7 hl ij' I Mi [,d,5 ; ". ' ,g 'O F y \\ . ~&l)f7,;%;, 4, 6 e .~ {.try[: ' ~~ ';<m',y

,1

-($ i.:/ x,. j \\ ~ ... f j f f V, !.'M j'tjs' A; ih ? ..t .g4 s 1 ..,, 1 f )2,y ,4.m s; f t? L (' (" ? ~' . - @)WY

y?

.J .a w ', '- , i; /,, . r ;.

Q.,

e 49 ,5 'i Nb:?:l];.. ?,: w??$h i fA .-O. L ' c'b h ($.h? ~ i s .h gum., i .n ,A -\\l \\ 3, - w;.; _.9 w f -,1 ' g.w 6 p h, '*.y$ {

;l,f.,

~. .',;'S, b -- ~' ", g.% p w.;. . t Y { [ ~ q w ;:. x.t. m u (z ec . ;2-rr iy r4 A n.n + ; t;l l: m;W5w, -1 y' }..,._Li. ' ff,Idd A:

/

. ;i. 1 3p.n ;,a.. o f..,. '.3 ~.c ,e i3, l -n(- n t .g; y ; ' y; :, ' x- -l . p.. .g_ .i .,q ~~1, g -) FIGURE WATER IPftERSIOf1 iEST

s. m _,___m- _a-I o ( l s {' E , g~ O( y? S , ' ',,, j ^ i i 1 P . p 6

p..

-<3 t Oc i

~

FIGURE 35 POST TEST INSPECTION

'm m. N NNN P (k 4; k $fa 4 o T A U ~ Cl. D k / s.' i- ~ ?. // E' O 7' ~ ~ ll ?(( j l m l ~ M 'c .ki [$ m m w?fh,',\\,) = ~ ' l* $@&, si,. s !!l,"Ils'>i.n.. !? '$w[;e\\, O l '$,q'e M r :,' % l' ' '{r'jp{gg - xa y,y ~-,

c n m P i L R ,,, ) ( I.,....... i. I ,. s i i L' f i FIGURE 37 o0ST TEST INSPECTION

,,,, C.[.l'f, g.cm7%,. -. _ r. AbWE$ .u:; (')g, l,. ...'l.... w.,x.:,c, ~

gv,:

n'y t. m :.... 1 O ., n.,.s d'?x.r. 4,an., i 4

(

4 .t.,..t ;;,. :. ^*% ~ .c. ,3.:.. 3,. y .,,t g ..g. 8 ,... 7-( n.. y y ~. * ? '= <g_ S.o ;W.. . r. E;g. .. m.

k. - 5 s

U-sl:c..... ~.' , e' . ::-?g:4, ,s. .3 s.

s..

,g wx4p.. 6%. 2.':,.%. v. >t ..,.6.W... L. :n.:.. 3 ..<..:>( /c., '

{'*

. u>.w,$ '.,:ce. ,y .av. J[9.%.,7.'IfQ83

u...

.,,,.. <. e...; ' 4.. w, s.. .. nwx......~ 3.;4. h76.d214 u... -... ~ Q~ R&:l f'fY" -c y ^ e g>. t ...n x, ,e 1 w. ,a \\ c-b(g"'m- %,;i n. % %g ^ { s e }l{,3 ~EN.Q.j;.%g, -,. Q

n % ~

\\ .f., s..x j t-y g 'q bhI ;f.

g.,,.

c.. ;

j n. k@ 9%.a ~PM

i b

f kg w .n.;;t.w g. g J.yy.h s , yi.:.yKi,'.E.

g N

n. ysR ;H4 ,e... <Qyg1 b.w.,pa %m?Y gtg

y. g.w::

\\ e 9(. ,. ::.3.,e. W, a. n \\ p.$.n.d.- .. ~. m,e.. s. sn,, x.:;. ,,,.on, v m,y. 'i. ~ .s.. ...O. ,;;.M" g.- " ' n';.,c.r..n ?~'.a?" d.W 6 M,nqsn.,c.a M :cn. g ' c 6.q. g 4 3 ...m-

y..n u s. n 3

p160RE 3g POST TEST INSPECTION

( 1,<.,..?, gc .{ ..,., f.t., f..,.... sa.., , s. j 2<.9 1 euw-.- s a ., fr..;,.,I..-J.,.. ,..,,.s.s'. t." .. -..y,, s,,p 3

7. /1/T. f,,.., ;.

.t : a-je,... ...e.sy:9 N..p, <g.1 g;p-\\ w. ..a. p. . s;. ;;,.g. y.. s.. g .t. L...;,, ; e.. ;. .......: i. --., ,.4,4,. ... - *l l;.y 2; R;& '.5 O;'*.tyga.:*L.,!: 0 R.'... ~. -. s %cf'+p.r;jy~TM.'t sll':_ :'.. '.,.,%.c'<Q. :{.. ^ . 9 ,G': . s ;,v... C..'::.*:.lQ; 1. Sc.q*?~.p., ;9 9.g ,,.;; y'.9,:.i:,22.rg2 s.., *s /.%.,,*:.:.

n.,. p@, c.,

1 5ln ;;.. ~ ~...s - 4 w. p. v.,,.... o \\ y :.. s. y *..... v. w,, m..... m: -4...myl/ . c.,.

-' u: ; y

', i. 4.. < ; ' 2.: ' : '.,..y.,- 1'... 'c.q:.w.y.'/.g."* *. ':. p :Na u:.'. a. : -. D*v:s ' ' /. : it:.

f. 4.[f,,,..
r..

\\ " f:;4...,. .r. ".,,;.V.,,,*

A I Jf. 7.;.k g.

f .p t 1

y._.i.

..,. 'r.-].m.r.r 'c~. ,p .... >;q : p. , t e,.,N.. r.,..,*, Q.c.. ;*. h- .'- /. .et >.* J.*A ..~.t,',,*,.... 1, 4 8*. r., ' '* gQ f.:g,., s,.< t g e. 0,, as *;'*- )' * ','. s

1 19. y~p

... '. '. *,*,' av ;: : ' c ,;a ;

y h.D.B.4

e. -

,1,,' l,. .f ,Q- .t e '* l Og.sfg,+:',y, . O ' r,0,,l...l h'*f g '.*._'e '<*4yM lv. .y p ' P. ~. ' u .pM J., g,if;,.o p ) Mow,, .'f g. a . N.?:Q :(.t,.s J. :. l y e

3.,

. s.,>, ?l-. -:..,, *.!'. s. 't. ,y . {= 0 c, . ef' ..'s !5' ; $ * *}.C ' ?- u ( J, e', ,. 9 f.*. ;.,. O.X$.y.;.t ' QlW.. !. t,!.* ' 6 . c:.: *l. ,t 1;la R *:i '.,. - ' A.,y 9, *. Q' 'l:.3. o?..a \\ s,p. y t a.4 ~'. p .Q4 ..a .'...,..r,. .,. e.,V

V %

V. ~ ".., t. !.; ? v.

r n&Q,,~..~l,.: .': ':.t ';)y'; s,.:.',R. -

r. A.,.m. j.,>l.w. s :t. u,,1 Rj..,s..i.

y...,.,*pkyk. y....,. n.. :

'.n

g.., -

m = 3. Q :. p. v %... t s. .a.,,. 2.,. - :. s.. , f. g c.q. .,4 .v....:..m:. ; Y h. ..f f[$b y' W>gJ f.f.,',. 4:..:'o?.+.h.g... ?. .Q. r,;sy r.::@W,.. . n? :5.a.?p.j..r a>..L:w.. : < g: :... e., :ck:fg ':':..l.m:.:i.&c. y%y .. ' w..m M.i .. :Q. e gl . a.,,. w. .'; A > 'o f; t

m.r. q, 4,

5 . ;R !L: :T;;dg.u..,. w,. v.9c?,i ' q N, 'C % '.:t N.V.6.. ;Q..: ..,i. Tim..'., y;.} FIGURE 39 CHARRED 1NSULATION DISC 1 i / ~

--r-( h U M Oc I l ' Il% h f,l h. i ,1 p. ,. h:.,.'.,l., .(t' b, I ,., ;g. ' '. c s. t , in. :, 4 r 1 ,. c; ~ 9;;5 4, l. '. E E .L. [fj Y ', ~ 1$ I~ d g ..s'd Jgym

~; 52:

1 u, 4+- i e u = a: k.' i 8 w 1 y. y/, $bm: A.h. Q Qli .. _ :l t.

!U ;

Me. q 'k@t M O P g ~ ** ~~ ...,;, q'.!. i.1, g Ah 6i . a., .m y Sk,$ ,. ;l L.4{' lI ( .q n a f f:' t ao p 1 j 4 . $ilit l

par,E 1 of 3 Oc 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. K1878 Date Tested 312_0]_80. 3/21/80, 4/1/80 and 4/2/80 OC Packaging Engineer [ Y-2-fo w //-///"7# Fuel Quality Control Engineer.ing 4'.[2/[lD-Licensing & Compliance Audits Traffic & Material Distribution A77/

f. /,/fd OL

PAGE 2 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 0174 Date Tested 3/20/80 and 3/21/80 OC Packaging Engineer M 9'.- 2.-Per / Fuel Quality Control Engineering M b/Y'IO ~g t/ 1/ g Licensing & Compliance Audits i / Traffic & Material Distribution M / d / OL

PAGE 3 of 3 APPENDIX 1 O( 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 OC F-2.-80 Packaging Engineer V V //-/4 -70 / Fuel Quality Control Engineering Y 2/ Licensing & Compliance Audits / '?77M //fo Traffic & Material Distribution / l OL

PAGE 1 of 3 O( APPENDIX 2 TEST CHECK SHEETS Container Drawing No. /2 8 O f 2.3/ Container Serial No. K /T 78 Date Pre Test Visual Inspection [/ J/ro/po per Paragraph 5.1 rgQ R8t oor< LoadingPaakincastoos-N alJo/n ~ ~ Water Spray Test ~ Q( Drop Test ~ Penetration Test y ~ Compression Test 30 Feet Free Drop i g/tc sfu//) )did. fR((} Puncture Test M Ik# Thermal Test Water Immersion Test /#n? "h8 IO Fuel Quality Control Engineering 7 I OL

PAGE 2 of 3 Q{ APPENDIX 2 i TEST CHECK SHEETS Container Drawing No. /jf O f23/ Container Serial No. KO/ 7Y Date Pre Test Visual Inspection per Paragraph 5.1 [ G[to/a gz,R8P oor # j f Loading (yppgpootr G/Jo/ro Water Spray Test Drop Test O( c Penetration Test Compression Test 30 Feet Free Drop i /4//c.7/w/9 /52/s.?pff) Puncture Test ~ Thermal Test Water Inmersion Test Fuel Quality Control Engineering / OC

PAGE 3 of 3 APPENDIX 2 p TEST CHECK SHEETS Container Drawing No. /23Bf2 J/ Container Serial No. N03/9 Date Pre Test Visual Inspection #Getoss) A% [3s/20 3 per Paragraph 6.1 ( AoS 3 31 fo Loading Ash Water Spray Test At (((fo Drop Test [fM I[ff Penetration Test [t Y// fU Compression Test [&,,,fo 30 feet Free Drop x ~ Puncture Test Thermal Test Water Immersion Test IO Fuel Quality Control Engineering / oc

i 1 l 1ll1 I lI.l' i h e h e ) ((h Y /w' B O D N o E T H D H b G E a' N G l T E B l I W D B W l ) I E A L E ( W f7 R / MJ E O 6 g l-T N i U D. O k R O = C 0 p E N 0 j o i L R O D i R A l D e g T 6 I Gm_ p R t 0 E a i O E m v. = T a st '5 Q A a WgF s a 'O = M n c 3 L A=S P, ia ) P e k m A, R W E S G o r 6 t N== N N v / t E o 9 D L t 6 I 7 g A ? n? a 2 A z n O s i L T H E G n I a E T W 0 b a a 9 2

1 s

s 1 6 7 s On G ] $ 'l i Y d ^ 1 i 1 i n lo 5 8 s / o s o s s R '" t o T P P a s N E E N ^d P V $ E M N'N 6 8 8 P Y 6 s I C H T P 2 R R C a s 5 n L C I a R 9 o 5 T a F N 6 s o e M E 1 i

\\_A "f~ ~ [,.' I R:qu:st No. b'O ~l 9 j NSR Area No. p c PROCESS AND EQUIPMENT / FACILITIES CHANGE REQUEST Q questor ) Initiating Component M C A Installation Responsibility Equipment Location C iJMO POUDER PACK AREA AND TEST PAD hTST OF 1Eux. Purpose of Change TEST LOADED BU- / AND BU-b COHTAINERS FOR RELICEbbE BY EU NRC. NATURAL _DE Description of Change STANDARD PACK b b-tGALLUN FAILS WITH 4b KUb UU I* 9 @OA] LOAD AND SEAL IN 2 BU-7 AND 1 BU-5 CONTAINERS. TEST CONTAINERS TO NRC TEST STANDARDS ATTACHED (30-FOOT DROP, 40-INCH, FIRE, ETC.) Scheduled Project Completion Preliminary NSE Review N d d By .v18/8 Final NSE Review Needed By 3/18/80 Requestor's Signature /Date n ) Mig /1V/8 kW 'L(AfW Nuclear Safety Engineering 3 f/ @6 1. Type Analysis Required: *Cri ticality O

R diological O

None 2. New/ Updated NSE Method Sheet Required: Crit. d Radio. /g/,3 None 3. AnticipatedAvailabilityofNSEpeth Shpe j Required / o.ff__ Signa tures:h e.icaility Safety _ If)) // v Rpc Crit _///M #A-4. ioJogical SafetgD u h Remarks: l< / b /EuW o r-f/co kMJ ll rc~~ 5. U /) Fuel Quality Control Engineerja hp n U l. Is New/ Changed Quality Instruction Required? Yes No If Yes, Anticipated Availability of Instruction 2. Responsible Fuel Quality Control Engineer s 3. Approval: Mgr., Fuel Quality Control Engineering Fuei Process Techno_ log M l. Is New/ Changed Instruction Required? Yes No If Yes, Anticipated Availability of Instruction 2. Responsible FPT Engineer t 3. Approval: Responsible FPT. Unit flanager SHOP hv rs 4 ~ Subsection Manager Approval b^ _ Area Manager l. Priority Assignment.For Nuclear Safety Review 2. Area Manager Approval Nuclear Safety Engineerig u. Date Approved Regnest Receihd Date Completed 'N O t "emecer accePtea<a of completed erosect _ oete CDocumented information from requestor required per P/P 40-5 Appx. A APPEN9fX 4 NF-1-014(llpf) URANIUM POWDER LOA. DING REQUEST . L _.... '.. _... _. . w.. f s

APPENDIX 3 Page 1 KnetM GENER AL $ ELECTRIC C RELATIONS AND IRILITIES OPERATION San Jose, California February 10, 1978 TEST RE' ;RT BU-5 AND BU-7 CONTAIr'R PRESSURE TEST A. OBJECTIVE The objective of this test was to verify _he integrity of the BU-5 and BU-7 containers for the New Japanese Container Regulations. { The procedures were presented to the Japanese and approved by them. B. SIBM\\RY The following tests were performed on one BU-5 and one BU-7 con-tainer on February 6,1978 thru February 10, 1978. 2 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/G1 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/Or for three hours O C.. v i

GENER AL Q ELECTRIC OC TEST REPORT 2-10-78 Page 2 C. TEST EQUIPMENT 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. Pemagage # 175 0 to 60 psi pressure gage, regulator and valves as shown in Figure 1. D. CALIBRATION The pressure gage was calibrated prior to testing. Calibration record and curve (Figure 2) are included in this report. Calibra-(d ( ' tion was made with equipment traceable to the National Bureau of ~' Standards conformance. 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 BU-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 OL

-.--.. _.. _ ~ _ -. -.. -. -. - GENERAL $ ELECTRIC i.- i. O( TEST REPORT 2-10-78 Page 3 i 2 1.25 gm/cm for 14 hours. There was no leakage in either case. i i i. Certified By: / /M7 8 J. A. Zidak W. S.'C6wan, Manager i Packaging Engineer Packaging Engineering i M/C 512 M/C 512 i, l JAZ/da i a e' 1O( l 4 i I 4 1 t i i F i LO L l i: --w,,--.g,,,,,w-, ,,,.,..,n,_,,,, ____,,,n,_ .,-, n..,_, ,,_,_.,_,_,,,,._,n.._.-nn,,,,,.,_,.,,,,.-,-w n----

4 e G S 0 e e e uc.k h0 9 e EE m< g O m a ~ 1 $h a ./ 8 e w g sp s s8 e g r3 e mu %.A M k W.- e m m m xy y u m $d 'i W "D xifL ~ / ?' v ~ s e T t s I: Yh = N y = s - - vM,Q'g t.-: .x ~ + ~.. ~ l V

_= _. _ _ _ - ..m._m m e . I J h..T . L.. 'I! ..l j t. .1. ; ...1

.;; ti.

i. t. ;.

,,. in. ; M...n. "..J; j,.... :-*;:* + t.. -{ ."...".e.n.g..~, .'

I ;T..';....' '. ~.._.Z.

. '.;1. 4.;.;. ;. a ~;...1... .;'.1..l. '.'.; :.'.*;. ......?- -?- .:g..' '... O..n. . 1.._ 1_.

_;;;. 1*;*...

-** ~ ..I. t + a,., . ~L. {._'... ..l.. _. j _.. .... )j,,. . ' l !* . u..... .' I. - ~ _ ~

.;;..-3..-

(...

m p- ..... t -.- (^\\ .j .._..r.. ...: W i ..I .......,,.I.... .. _.......u,; ,,...g[;.

}..-

.n, g. -,, . g ,_.1.._- .-...i. ........................,,....!,.t... ....o. I...... .---{___. .q....... _....... I... .. 4.._., _...L.., ....)._,_ .I..u .y.. .... { ... ~ ~. _.._.. ... _.., _.t..... ..o__...... ...t... ....m. ~1 ... _.. _.....e..._. . u...._ _.. __3._ ._n.._..._t_._.., ._.7._ _j.. .t..,. _._1_. [... l . g _.__.... _...... _ _............ _..._. _ ... t, .. 1 _ ._......._...g....;... . q ~_.....,.. ....t. i _. ) _. _...1.. s .__t. +. _. _. _..... j. _. .._d... __ _. ... l _.. ._,)....._. .. _.... g._ .._,.....,2.__.. ... g.......... .y., ....g__. _.}.. ._..4.... .. _...e._ 1__.._;.._ _;__.,.,__.__2._,._ _._ J .~ _ _ _. _ _.'t.___.. __..._ 1._ . 12 _.... _.. .,_.;_..._ _....._.t___._._._ ..1._.._.. _. ...4.._ 1... ._.,_t_._.. .4.. ._1__._..1 _. _...j.. .. t._.. _4_._.. .._.4.__ ._.j_.. _. _._I.'**. ._.6. .__j.... _ f. _ g_. ......_ _.f _..~....., . _.....g_. _..1.....__._, _4 ...a. . ~.._. _ _. t. .. q.__.

t. _...... _ _..., _

. _ -... j _... ... _.. _.....t..... ..s.. 7.___ ...._ j.. ..p__.._..._.. 9._. _-_.i_ .....,4.... 1 j . ~.... _..,.._..I .,. _..4__ I._... _..i. .._..I...........,L,...I.__._.6._.. ._..6.__. ..I... . _6._.. ed ~ _ _ .....I._. ~. .. ~. I, ~ .I.__ k __... _.. _.I ..J..,._.. .t.. _.._4_.__.. ..... _.. _......t... _._..._..._t._.____... _. _. I_- __ w .t._._.. _a... y. _.t.. _.e._ _.__o.. _.,.. ...,.l.. _. +.... . I' _ .. I. .. _ _...6 .6... . ^ 1. .l._. _. __([ ~ t__. .. t _.._.... _...._ i_._ .....t... . t __. __..e _. _...t.._.. ...4 . l... M. a _ . _ _...._.I._.... ...I._.. ._1 ._.l..... .a,._...... _. ._g. . _.......T -.6.s._. I. _.. ._ s ..l- .f. .._l... . L g _.l

4. _4. I.,.I

_t._... 4.... .I.._...._..-..... I ......_._t._._ ._.l..~ e-o. w, a. .. t... .J.... 1. ..._..._.I_........, Ne _.)_._..._..._ . _......-.6 ._. g._ ..l._._.-. .__._g..s. .1_._ J.. .-1..__..... . _.....t... t., ..t.. ...l._.... .~- _-... .I-t ..I..... _....41 .J.._.__. .._..t._.. -... _., +..... .. t _.. ..1- ..._i_..... !. %.__.~.., 1. ( ..4.__.. I._._....m. ..,...__},. . _ ~... _.. ._.t_ .1.-.l.__.... . _ ~ _... ..1__... ..!._... _ t.._ ....I.. ~ _. _ _ ___ ..J.. . -. -,. ~.......... .. _.t _.... . - _.... _- 6 ...a. .. _.,_.T.. .-..._..d-+..s-$.=_. _ __j. _n ._l_._. 4._ . - _...~.g-.... ._.1.g-......-- .~. -....g.. ...-g--... -.. ~. e 4, _._.. _.. ..-4.. a y i. (.; f\\J ( r .. _ TT _.....)... _._._4_ .f.__. _j ._1, ___ . {. _.. .. _ -...-g... .- -.f.... 7_.._ .~...$,.,.... _p.. M i-.g _. w ,. ~.. ,=- g_ _.3,~.._...-... _ _ _.1.._.. _q . _. _..,... ~..-. ..._I.'.._ ^ ._t.1.......~..- ..... _.,-g_..__. .T_..._ _. _-- -4.. - ~ -.., _ t.... .... ~.. . 1..-- .~.... .l .l __6._ .l'....._.~...6._.. _-!... (7 ~~;-3. .....!,.... _ _._..._f-_.. ~-.._-1.... ..-. -.. -... -..,--.--p- .~ .. t -- .~. . -.7. __ y _. _ +.. _ ...~..-.--..--..-Ile-... ( ___.t_. .....-.1 v w- _ _... _.J. _. .~-}... -... .. ~ - --.. ( ....l -.4. _. ._t._._. . _.. _.._*..t___ ..___ _....... ~..,.. _..-- r.. y. _.. ~ 6. ~.. -..~.3.- - - - ^ -..._3.. . - ~. _ _ . I_ -..._ ,_- I.. +. - + - -t. -r-- =. L.--- -- t... * * -. --' w* Qe f.... . _.. + _. i' d.1- .t_.. ~_._1_.....t._.-. o l.. ..... --.... l.- -....... L- ~.__. -~ -... .... - -., ~. ......s-- e . +. ~., _ .w .6... ? ( s. .+.-.. -, - ._. t.... ~.. ._ t _4....- . _... _....t... ......s.... j. - g... .-. j --...... -.f -.-- r _ ;3. - t--.

3.......

. _. _.. ~. . + - ~~ g 3 _3.._.... - _... _... ..t ... ~..- .. l.. l..- .g.---.--..-......- - . -s -e. - ---t-- g. --.4.. g.... ~- .4- .6 ..6... 4_... .. t'. ..j.... .. +. - ..... _.... j - ~ -..e.- _g.. .~.... -..= .--.7.- .t .....~...l_. _.. -. _ ~ ._..f-.. . -..+--I..- -y +.... + _+ _.4.,......... 4 a

M.

- I. g ~- g.. -..i.. .g-3 . ~..... ~. -. * -. .. t. ...e... ...+t_^'.~.. ...-- g -. r.- O -- -.-.. +- l-t ".t_.+ ....... t.. 1 ....-1 ....t~..-... -...... .t.... .. _. __.-.... l.....~..... ... +. .I -- f.. ....4.._ ........t_,.... ~.. +. + s....--. -,.~. ..-1..-. ..... ~.... -. ~..,,. _..... .s.. ...l~ .. ~.. -.. .... -...,..a ..l.... - e..... ..~ -. . s... \\.* - .s...

9.....

e m. .....t.. ... l. .1... t... s 1 .~a. .. l +... \\. - .. t, ~. ..+ ...~ + ... +. ... K. -.....- ~.g--.. n..- . ~...... .. ~ l. .. ~.... -. + . -+- 'A g-.. ~..,.. + .+ e- ... 1... .-.,....~. t. ........ ~. ..~-. _ -.--..-- ...~. ~... - -. .-..l.--- ....4_.-. .-j-....!... .. t_.... t. ... ~ -.... ..f..- -......-.... - -.... - -.I. .. ~.... j ~ -..e..' -4 + . l....~...5~. + q -.,. - -.... ~.. ~. .- -. -+ - - .- - - - = ". +.._-. _. - . ~.... i o a g ..t.- .A i .~...!...... ~.., -. .e - 6 7 ..g... . g. - . !.t Z.:. ".2 4 ;' r. "..-l 1..... ' - ~. ;..C., 2%. C. *. L 2 *;.**C...I..*C...*d.. T. C..- 2.. '; -..2 %. --.. E.' i ' ~ '*'..g'.". ~ * ^ ^ *- ......Z::t. r.. J. ': j -. -.~~~j'. -.'t'.. ~~ 1. 1 L....- R."f*. ~. ..t...... t 1. 1.- {"

~

j .g. g.- ..g g ~.... . 1 -- - . -.. 1... .t-. 4 .a..-.- -M -. -.-+l....... .i . n. I. ~ t .j-.. i 4 I h o to o

su

ii?.G W.En# MA'a:u5gL=Mtme.sl%6%$.:Gl?iUM2.2E'M.::.S.3h. :- O.9.g8@k25Mb,W%%IC n.+3 t. -ngw-t+ mni-m,..H:;;%.1NO:JLS:

w-ws CONTAINERS-lBU 5 S/N B-7522 'T(0 ( 8U 7 S/N KO397 T E ST,.. DA TA - I ~ DATE TI M E '. PRESSURE PERIOD TEST RESULT i, D - 7 8' K.soAm so(e ustet i 4 t yen ZAv.s_..Bara vo_Bvv atp__oor t.ene i a I )-T-18 10.* coa t el$ e nh.. Y 1 *ca PM , '15 3 HRS _8vf bloJCADUs I Qo PM I, o Ko/cn e A

1T 9h 1* O
/cHk SYy_ Hts..0 W fLo_$_CAntiS+'

2-7-77 bo AN 1.2f #d:4* 10too A n. l.2f $M b tl#3 805 tysJemise 1 allo _Ait A 50 "'In' YAs 1410 Eta l.So P 3 3 Hts B05 troLEA7Kasz. ('!9 T I

1C PM.1f Kyc 1

v ' 7ET Ll,' jf ?h,75 W/lp3r_ 3ll($ __f0] ye$CAGUE i E 78 4'17 Pt1 1. o 4} r,' I. L-9 -7 T 9;1sPn j, c @bn ' 3 9Rs Bd 7 tuo I EMAGE $ 1-9-77 7' 2c PM 12s* 4/cs*

-lo -7 8 9 '. 2oA A 125 Mco' l4 ##3 Ad7 A/cLA 646$5

' -Il - 77 9.'.?0 AMJ fo kbd /j M1- > T L'00 Ul ).So Y9/cr133]I. HRS B()1 N__kCA&' IGE! 2 t G e G I I t /R., s t +h 5 I'~ ^

D[*.l..h[h[g' Ej,['g33}g CAUBRATION - h-hI .libM. g ,b I

1. SE RVICdaa, I-s i-7d BY DATE (0,

m (d' maw.z . ~'G Mall!TEllAl'CE RECORD TECHNOLOGY & DEVELOPMENT METROLOGY & CAllBR ATION LABORAT9'llES

3. REVIEWED BY DATE I

4. F AMILY CODE 5.MF R CGDE

6. MODE UDWG NO.

18. R ACK/SYS IC NO.

DtlGSul:_F NId HEM A6 AG C-D6 N

7. IC NO.

8. S T A TUS

9. PREVIOUS CYCLE

10. MOS E LA PSE D 11.

19. OPE R ATION s/A r+ um nA w/u w.c%

12. D ATE SE RVICE D

13. D ATE DUE

14. CAL HRS 15.M AINT HRS 16 OTHER HRS 17.

20. LOC ATION b lYR)h FW b !YR 1.O C.O o.O T o-M L R 9 FW

21. M ANUF ACTU RE R

22. INST RUMF.NT N AME

23. SE RI AL NO.

KAcsentLTom PfECGuS,e 6AuGE 84(6E

24. SPE CIF ic.t TIO NS

25. PROCEDURE USED

~ E L d M - l '2. - 00 5' 7 MFG

26. D AT A ISSUEO7 O OTHER (DESCRIBEl-O YES

27. REPORT NO.

WC

28. TYPE OF SERVICE

29. R EC EIVE D

30. LAST SE RVICE D

33. LABOR ATORY ENVIRONMENT

[CALIBR ATION CERTIFICATIONFW D !YR FW YR TE MPE R ATURE 'C

31. ASSIGNED RECAL L IN TE RV AL O PREVENTIVE MAINTEN ANCE

%%i RELATIVE HUMIDITY O OTHER (EXPLAIN)- 32 SPECIFICATIONSF

34. OPE R ATION ALr BTN' O OuT MES O i:0 O

c-Vg CAllBR ATION INSTRUMENTATION USED MFR MODEL DR AWING NEXT DUE MFR MODEL DR AWING NEXT DUE IC NO. IC NO. CODE NUM3Ea1 FOR CAL CODE NUMBER FOR CAL HE CHV-6524 606 63 5 ~598 I i l l 9EMARKS

CAllBR ATION DATA u it.iErd N AME IC NO. MFR MAtcu AttToted MODE L OR AWING NO. SE RIAL NO. Vl;EM A6 A6E 176 84166 FUNCTION AND/OR CA LIBR ATION NOMINAL RANGE TESTED TOLERANCES VALUE INITIAL RUN T Ll/ FINAL RUN ()- 6 0 P S lg,. TEST STAudAnp cAuce-o e o s

4. 5 6

to 9.35 lo 15 I4. DT 15 20

19. cf Do n

D 'f. QO DE 30

29. n5 So 4o

39. c o 48 I >L so

49. c, o so 60

59. GO GO M

e t~ 1 m

APPLICATION FOR REVISION OF NRC CERTIFICATE OF C011PLI ANCE USA /9019/B()F FOR THE BU-7 TRANSPORT PACKAGE ENCLOSURE 1B i CRITICALITY SAFETY ANALYSIS OF TIIE BU-7 SIIIPPING PACKAGE FOR URANIU51 OXIDE POWDER w, c.

Prepared: 3/6/80 l CRITICALITY SAFETY ANALYSIS OF BU-7 SHIPPING CONTAINER FOR UO POWDER 2 'l.0 INTRODUCTION 1 Model BU-7 shipping containers are used by the General 2 Electric Company for the transportation of low-enriched j unirradiated uranium oxide powder. The BU-7 container is [ a fissile Class I package which is currently licensed for a maximum U-235 enrichment of 4.0% with no more than two five - f gallon containers, each limited to no more than one safe a batch of UO2 powder. In addition, it is required that the H/U ratio in the fuel in each five-gallon container must be i no more than 0.45. The purpose of the present analysis is ( to extend the Fissile Class I certification for the BU-7 to l include the following: 1.1 Increased water moderation by increasing the fuel H/U limit from 0.45 to 1.577. 1.2 Replacement of the safe batch limit with a limit of 35 Kg UO per five-gallon container. The total BU-7 7 container mass limit is still 89 Kg. es s k'k l.3 Reduced levels of insulating media (phenolic resin) ~ composition and densities requiring tnat at least 60% by weight of each of the constituents of the full density phenolic resin must be present. 1.4 The presence of carbon in the UO fuel pr vided that the 2 C/U ratio in the U0 fuel mixture does not exceed 1.262. 2 All other limits and requirements for the BU-7 container are unchanged. 2.0 ANALYSIS SCOPE The present analysis has been undertaken to demonstrate that the GE Model BU-7 shipping container meets the applicable criticality safety standards for Fissile Class I shipping packages as required by Part 71, Title 10, of the Code of Federal Regulations. 2.1 BU-7 Container Specifications g This analysis is valid for the following BU-7 container (~N, specifications. ( \\ l i \\

(huv(['. 2.1.1 Outer Container ()T \\ 18-gauge, 55 gallon steel drum, or similar drums larger in dimensions or with thicker steel walls (reference Drawing 128D5231). Drums with smaller dimensions or with steel walls which are thinner than 18 gauge are not covered by this analysis. 2.1.2 Insulation Phenolic resin containing the amounts of hydrogen, boron, carbon, nitrogen and chlorine and minimum resin density as shown in Table 4.1. .2.1.3 Inner Container 16-gallon, 18-gauge steel drum with an inner diameter of 13.75 i 0.25 inches and an inner height of 27.75 t 0.25 inches. This container must have a leak-proof seal and cover as described in Drawing 128D5231. 2.1.4 Contents ('3 r 3 Two five-gallon steel containers or three (/\\' three-gallon steel containers with an inner gh./ diameter no greater than 11.25 inches and with a total stacked height of no more than~27.64 inches. The steel containers must be at least 0.02_06 inches thick. Plastic bags wrapped around the five-gallon container or used as a liner inside of the container are permitted. 2.1.5 Fuel Up to 70 Kg of UO2 powder per BU-7 container at a U-235 enrichment of no more than 4.0%. Each five-gallon product container may hold no mcre than 35 Kg of U0 The U0, powder may be mixed withwaterorhydr. ogen-carton additions subject to the requirements that the fuel-additive mixture may not exceed: .1 an H/U ratio of 1.577 .2 a C/U ratio of 1.262 ( )[' In addition, the bulk density of the U0, powder 2~ may not exceed 4.5 gm/cc. M I

a 2.2 Fissile Class I Criteria r^g k_/ I To demonstrate that the BU-7 shipping container as described in Section 2.1 meets the criticality safety standards for Fissile Class I packages as defined in Part 71, Title 10, of the Code of Federal Regulations, the following calculations have been performed. 2.2.1 Normal Case The K. of an infinite array of BU-7 containers has been calculated for three cases: full density phenolic resin, 80% of full density phenolic resin and 60% of full density phenolic resin. 2.2.2 Accident Case The K gg of a 256 unit array has been calculated e for the conditions of optimum interspersed modera-tion and full reflection of the array. This analysis was performed for BU-7 containers limited to 2 x 35 = 70 Kg of UO2 as well as for the case or the two product (five gallon) containers filled with powder at a UO2 density of 4.5 gm/cc (202 Kg UO2 total). 2.2.3 Evaluation of Carbon O(1 t-The most reactive cases in 2.2.1 and 2.2.2 (with 35 Kg UO /five-gallon container limit) were 2 reanalyzed for UO -H O mixtures to which an addi-2 2 tional amount of carbon was added. The atom density of the carbon was taken to be 80% of the atom density of hydrogen in the mixture to simulate mixtures of UO,10,000 ppm by weight of 2 water and 40,000 ppm by weight of H-C additives. 2.2.4 Accidents Involving a Single BU-7 Container To demonstrate the safety of a single BU-7 con-tainer under extraordinary upset conditions, two five-gallon product containers have been analyzed for optimum moderation and full reflection by water. 2.2.5 Concrete Reflection The impact of concrete reflection of the most reactive 256 unit array as described in Section 2.2.2 has been analyzed. b -

2.2.6 Code Validation / To demonstrate the validity of the computational codes used in this analysis, validation calcula-tions have been made for the following cases: .1 Comparison between codes for: - e Normal case (K ) BU-7 container e 256 unit array of BU-7 containers with optimum interspersed moderation and full reflection by water A single BC-7 container with 0.075 gm/cc e of interspersed water e Two five-gallon containers in a vertical column with optimally moderated UO and 2 with full reflection by water .2 Calculation of the Keffs f the low enriched U038 low moderated benchmark critical experi-ments described in Reference 7. 2.3 Analytical Methods The criticality analysis of the BU-7 container has been performed with the General Electric Company MERIT and GEMER codes and with the KENO IV Monte Carlo Code. MERIT and GEMER are Monte Carlo neutron transport codes which employ 190 broad group cross section sets generated from ENDF/B-IV and which treat resonance absorption by explicit-ly modelling the resonance parameters on a discrete energy basis. The difference between MERIT and GEMER is that the former has a geometry package especially designed to model BNR lattices while the latter has an enhanced version of the regular and generalized geometry packages in the KENO IV code. The KENO IV Monte Carlo' Code was used in this analysis with 16 group modified Hansen and Roach cross section sets (Reference 5). 3.0

SUMMARY

AND CONCLUSIONS The results of this analysis have demonstrated that the GE Model BU-7 shipping container meets the criticality safety requirements of 10 CFR 71 for a Fissile Class I package for the transporta-tion subject to the conditions specified in Section 2.1 of this ~ analysis. In summary, these results are: V' _4_

i 3.1 Normal Case The K= calculated with KENO IV for the normal case BU-7 container is 0.903 1 0.003. 3.2 Accident case The Keff calculated with KENO IV for the 256 unit array of BU-7 containers with the most reactive degree of interspersed moderation and with full reflection by water is 0.955 1 0.005 for 202 Kg UO per BU-7 container 2 and 0.750 1 0.005 for 70 Kg UO Per BU-7 container 2 3.3 Presence of Carbon The presence of carbon in amounts which. result in a C/U ratio in the fuel of no more than 1.262 increases the effective of the BU-7 container by less than 1.25%. K Applying this to the values in 3.2 and 3.1 above for BU-7 containers limited to not more than 70 Kg 00 per 7 container does not result in critically unsafe re&ctivities for these cases. }{ 3.4 Two Five-Gallon (Product) Containers The Keff calculated with KENO IV of two closely packed five gallon product containers with optimum moderation and full reflection by water is Keff = 0.968 1 0.006 if the UO contents of the 2 containers are not restricted (approximately 65 Kg U0 Per container) 2 Keff = 0.909 1 0.005 if the UO contents of each of the containers are restricted to 35 Kg. 3.5 Concrete Reflection Concrete reflection on all six sides of the 256 unit accident array of BU-7 containers (limited to 70 Kg UO2 per container) results in a K f 0.789 10.004, eff an increase of 5.2% over the water reflected system. OL J. - ~. _,____J

3.6 Code Validation (~%(j (. The validation calculations performed in this analysis ,b,p have demonstrated that 3.6.1 For infinite or finite arrays of BU-7 containers, MERIT and GEMER predict neutron multiplication factors from 2 to 5% lower than the values calcu-lated by KENO IV. MERIT and GEMER results are in excellent agreement. The discrepancy with KENO is due in part to the cross-section sets used in the KENO calculations. The cross-section sets were determine based only upon the moderation in the fuel mixture. 3.6.2 For a single BU-7 container, MERIT, GEMER and KENO IV all agree with 0.4%. 3.6.3 Likewise, MERIT, GEMER and KENO IV are in excellent agreement for the case of two closely-packed opti-mally moderated fully reflected five-gallon con-tainers (with UO contents of 65.8 Kg or more per 2 container). 3.6.4 For the Rocky Flats low enriched U 0 1 w m derated 38 benchmarks, the KENO IV calculated h,eff averaged /") g over the 10 cases is 0.997 + 0.002 and the GEMER \\>\\ value is 1.003 + 0.003.(for 7 cases) M ~ 4.0 PACKAGE DESCRIPTION ~ ~ ' BU-7 shipping containers are 55-gallon drums constructed of 18 gauge steel which contain an inner 16-gallon, 18 gauge steel drum enclosed in and supported by a phenolic resin liner. Specifications of the BU-7 shipping container are given in Figure 4.1, Drawing 128D5231, Figure 4.2 (ANSI MN 2.2-1974, UFC-Rule 40 55-gallon drum) and Figure 4.3 (ANSI MH 2.5-1974, DOT specification 17H 55-gallon drum), and include: 55 gallon drum dimensions: Diameter 22 inches Height 33 5/8 inches Thickness 0.0428 inches Material Carbon steel 16 gallon drum inner dimensions: Diameter 13 15/16 inches Height 27 inches Thickness 0.0428 inches Material Carbon Steel 5 and 3 gallon product container: Diameter 11 1/4 inches ( )(_ Inner Dimensions Height 13.5 incues (5 gallon) 7.5 inches (3 gallon) Thickness 0.0,208 inches Material Carbon Steel B

FIGURE 4.1 - BU-7 SIIIPPING CONTAINER- ,s a- .il t, l w - s, .l.> h... ,V r,. .n, ., 1: 5li.II 5 I,! N I !! N .f

f. :2f.

'l a 5 !, i i,j iNl;lhl'c(j$:N!! !e ,1 .,\\..g:a:r r - -i .f. s

n"
i e

i .f fi et 8-l'i:; . l '.b i l' i,g-li,b.:a q. i,s 9... s. w cls. - 4:=['.s; r ..g. ~ '*q '. a i ! 8* fon. t 'jj i. s1 U *.**; !g. 8 'se i { I d .,u s t; a 2.s 3

vi q:, ::. y :."

4, j,, )e.-, i.. a.,a.s a .,1 z, i t, i it

h..es.

, 3.}g

i i.

.,,. 3.d*ji,.:gr!! 3 b t,y

g..ge._L g:;

3 i I

I

, g.. 5 , t :, ,5. l d. ..J t u .l a a. *.i + . tf .a, t e .o 1 8...l *- . o. LI s 3 .i g t fij3 '. dh.:., 3. 3 4 a i i;, jg; h ;lj.. i,!' I, O e ths L.g-e {. ,i d 8 I,. {t ( . s t, ' ji ,j .i-.-..-... ..@gm t __ g'.' :: (- J iI g.y. 9. gg! E33 -e

22 ::

,'2 iP { " } ** 3 M l ;~ 2 "y-* * * - .e -M - iil *l 34: 3363 3 e a l p :, H- 'f H.3.. i g le.. 5 H Ct l: 4=3 $ r. : < 3,4,. g* {. o

o a,, P,4

= g 4 tu *, 39 aS*h?

tf-

. at a -let, n v. s J 3 as L..- dag 4 88' #' Jj9e , 8 an d 4J { j's1 s g4Ed 8pedd y

77.~4

. yel Twg ,.'***"NP. i s,. ur-o, g.. . lt a,:s n p ir, i - ' *.p3 n-

z w...:

p,,. 3'.o r.,.,~t__ cm ,, 9'

'4 T

y 3., \\ -e,.c .a e. 'a -o u N 2. a. at i. I 3 0"3

- g

.. c-.O. .s r. 3 <e t s- .a. ajag .$j

- c

/. 2 '2]4. N; ,,. s N N y [ $r U I y ' N'.A. 'N' g.\\, = .1 .Iy[ N. l a.e a2 8 n k S..-d 32 V. -N..- o,

,i

,a P 3s y . 3- ,/ = s s N 5.s 4. I -y,W J@ ,f s I a 9 ,,a N. '.<N< 5.i. .i - a 8 l S. l i s ,m ' g k. - 6' 'o)[ 7 Tw ~- i "\\ ,N r L,. i 6 3 M( j .C l. J..'. N ' N" s N -x v f..'i "M h 'j - I

/

a s. d.,s!

$ k 'S 2- ~ 'i .b.1d

1. Q>

J jij' 3 9 ~-. _._,A'.' t ;0,3, 1 k,.g <\\ pU o 1 -.3

(%

i J l' 1 w )I7 $3,

* {,

a' s. I' . z a. 01 ..)

n.,.1. <4 :.et

.s. - j a.: f..s. ) M , t : >..p. s.l e

.t-11 s

..a-z p* s tos \\ j i~5 ;'g-a 4.J u \\ g n '* ti -}- - W aiie' 1 ~ t. a :N. 45 h O,.y s g48 l o-2- O' g + jd i*a p .. p ~ j!s.' ~1 t 4 l 4.- \\ b~ n.le L"

t TI!

<f i

mna

,,g i I o p fp, d' /h

n

'f / l 1 4 jfJ8'0 v

g 1 % 5",

L - ___ :i*

s: rg o*

13 9.- e i { .\\ 4 2.. C t. t 2 s

. 2<c n 1::f j

.::I

~, T,:. 'r .A;r 1 i - r-f. wl ..ed-:. i, ;, 5o N

3

". r. \\.% >,,., O...: 2 ii s e 3:: r _., P,,3 - t. i ! " ~> i: 1 6" 1.- -y 1' .o 2; \\s' N . it '. a 1,3 1:... s o. s i a/ -2 4<_n-.- r-j

s...,

em t,- s n (- Y 5 JJ:'. O:o o - 1 th.. :gl ',M, - 2 i , ) t. t a T c.- , 1 i,. 2 .. n .n i-. - t ^ -e .~. ;* t:; ,zi a (r.~.- 2 ~ ...- S:. : .e ~ 6) ,p. O,, / r 'N e s (E. ~. ' :Kjji 'N 1 a ._t x / sN ): - --t i 4 a .e i i e+. 6 1

ANSI MH2.21974 FIGURE 4.2 - UFC-RULE 40 55-GALLON DRUM 23l6 d. l p ~~ 7 _{ a f~ 3E2 23h- ={ l c ^ ~ .. L : : I ~, Y. ~, ~~. ~- Q - -- ~ - g-Il l 8 t l c l 1 t h t- . Ais-Q: c my - [ l OC D d l 34 4 i 35,1 N 6 C A .- 22 ' ll8 = 2 3-MIN (SEE NOTE 2) - g MAX ll. _. _. _ . _..~ ~ _ ~. ~ !_l ....f. 'l.. _ _. 3 4 NOTI.S: Il) All dtmensions are en in.hn. (2) Minunut. conicuty ui I.oit.im hud as 3/8 in h- +

ANSI MH2.51974 FIGURE 4.3 - DOT SPECIFICATION 17H 55-GALLON DRUM p \\ - 23;lgl 7 ra L^ m P a 2 27 23f2 = 23h I y-'yre.m: m.. = no e 3 en ^ n'( V 3 34 5 N. 34 4G -.3/ d a 22h il'" 3-MIN 8 (SEE NOTE 2) 5 max c r4 a, y_ c l L3 al NOTLS: fm Ill All darnenitons are in in, lies fJ(/ (21 lhew dmisnwuns are ai ria:able to both the top anJ butsom he4Ji..%tinimum corneut> of ca h he J n 3 a a v - 8A -

The 16 gallon drum has been modified by the welded attach-ment of a closure flange to accept a 3/16 inch thick steel cnver which ,q (- is gasketed for resistance to high temperature and is attached \\ NEM ' ' by twelve 5/16-inch steel bolts. This gasket has been demon-strated to survive the drop, flame, flood and impact tests required by 10 CFR 71 and insures that the five gallon product pails con-tained within the 16 gallon-drum do not come into contact with additional moderating materials (for example, water) as a result of the postulated accident conditions. Due to the 11.25 inch inner diameter and maximum height of 13.5 inches, a single standard product pail has a volume of no more than 22.5 liters. This is less than the 29.0 liter safe volume limit for containers of optimally moderated UO2 powder at en-richments not exceeding 4.0% U-235. As described in Figure 4.1, the space between the concentric inner 16 gallon and outer 55 gallon drums is completely filled with a solid phenolic resin insulating material. The chemi-3 cal composition of full density ( 8 + 1 lbs/ft ) phenolic resin is shown in Table 4.1. 9( e \\ s_- (,

t V TABLE 4.1 CHEMICAL COMPOSITION OF FULL DENSITY PHENOLIC RESIN INSULATION ELDDEAL WEIGHT PER CENT OIMTIC COMPOUNDS-WEIGHT PER CEtTf Element Full Density Weight Weight Element Per Cent Material Per Cent Hydrogen 4.5 Union Carbide Phenolic 65.8 Pesin BRL 2760 Boron 3.2 Silicone Surfactant LS30 2.0 Carbon 41.0 Boric Anhydride B-203 8.2 Nitrogen (approx) 0.0 Anhydride Oxalic Acide 8.2 Oxygen 48.6 Freon 113 6.6 luorine (approx) 0.0 Fiberglass Ibving 9.6 Silicone 2.2 Chlorine 0.5 'Ibtal 100.0 100.4 Density = 8 + 1 lb/ft Mininun Permissible Density 4.8 lb/ft OL a __.

1 - l l ( ) .0 TECHNICAL CONSIDERATION km/ 5.1 Mixtures Densities The mixture atom densities used in this criticality safdty analysis are tabulated in Appendix A. The 16 group modified Hansen and Roach U-235 and U-238 cross section sets used in the KENO IV Monte Carlo calcula-tions were taken to be the sets corresponding to min min c-and cr U-235 U-238 with min G~ 0 g p as described in Table 5.1 and with no other a satisfying a c- $c"* Theo's are the potential scattering cross section values ()( (in b arns) corresponding to U-235 and U-238 cross-section g/ sets (Reference 4). S 1_/L sd 11

BLE 5.1 KENO IV RESCNANCE ABSORPTION CROSS SECTICN CAICULATICNS i N i "p g = No where Ng = atom density of isotope i in mixture "i = potential scattering cross section for material i as tabulated below 43 = atom density of isotope whose effective resonance absorption cross section is being computed Material / Isotope i (barns) Hydrogen 20.0 Carbon 4.7 Oxygen 3.8 ( U-235 15.0 U-238 10.7 Water 43.8 e d 5.1.1 Moderation of Fuel Mixture l \\ As noted in Section 4.0, in leakage of water into j the 16 gallon inner drum (and consequently into the five or three gallon product containers) does not occur under the postulated accident conditions (drop, flame, flood or imp.act). The level of modera-tion in the five or three gallon product containers will therefore not change when the 7.U-7 containers are subject to the postulated accident conditions. The maximum normal levels of water or hydrogeneous moderation in the UO2 p wder are: .1 from 0.3 to 1.0% by-weight of moisture (H 0 ) 2 .2 for certain blends of UO Powder up to 4.0% 2 by weight of hydrogen-carbon materials for which e the hydrogen content is less than the equivalent of 4.0 weight per cent of water e the ratio of atoms of hydrogen to atoms of carbon in the additive is no less than one. 5.1.2 Fuel Mixture { Atom densities of the fuel mixtures for 4.0% en-riched UO Powder and water used in the present 2 analysis are tabulated in Appendix A. These mixture densities were computed in one of two ways: .1 Mixtures with 50,000 ppm of water or its equivalent For systems of UO2 p wder and water in which the water content is restricted to low volumes, fuel-water mixtures may be determined by taking the maximum UO density and water density 2 possible. F,or UO powder, the maximum density 3 possible is less than 4.5 gm/cc unless mechanical presses (etc.) have been used to compress the powder. Mixtures of UO and 50,000 ppm H O are 2 2 then specified by (3U02 = 4.5 0 fHO= 2

0.05 = 0.23684 gm/cc 2

0.95) N = 0.80

th (atom densities)

{}{ earbon v ;

This last condition simulates a mixture of 10,000 ppm H 0 and 40,000 ppm of hydrogen-carbon additive (. in whkch the weight fraction of hydrogen is the same as that in water (11.19%) and for which the ratio of hydrogen atoms to carbon atoms (in the additive) is no less than one. .2 UO - H O Mixtures Occupying Minimum Theoretical Vokumes2 Given a weight fraction of vater in the mixture, the densities of UO and water are specified by 2 (UO (1 - WFHO = 2 2 [1-WFHO 2 I+ WF 10.96 ) HO 2 and UO ( fHO=1-2 2 10.96 As in 5.3.1, maximum permissible carbon content is determined by NC = 0.80

NH CX

. v.;

5.2 BU-7 Geometry model r~)( ~ \\- %d The geometry model used in this analysis is illustrated in Figure 5.1 and the KENO IV and GEMER geometry input is tabulated in Tables 5.2 thru 5.4. For the normal case, the Figure 5.1 model was spacially reflected on all six sides (J = 0) to simulate an infinite array. Calculations were then performed for the phenolic resin insulation mixtures in Regions 6 and 8 or for varying amounts of interspersed water in Regions 6, 7, 8, 10 and 12. Calculations were also performed with interspersed water in Region 4 as well in order to evaluate the impact of close-packed moderation about the five or three gallon product pails. The three-gallon product pails were not explicitly modeled since it is readily evident that they are less reactive than the five-gallon containers (less UO2, m re carbon steel and smaller volumes). For the accident analysis, a 256 unit array was defined with the same Table 5.2 - 5.4 geometry but with eight containers in the X and Y directions and four containers in the Z direction. The 8 x 8 x 4 configuration gives the array with the minimum geometrical buckling and is therefore the most reactive case from an array geometry standpoint. (~)( w 8 nl v sd - - _.._.

FIGURE 5.1: KENO /GEMER GEOMETRY MODEL FOR BU-7. CONTAINER Z O( h Ja N

___________5 y ng a

l Jos, PL. -.1, < 4,., o.- I~hne.vl waer 5x3 %'d /I h se mJ w.he '5.10 cs CS i3 Ca<ba She l 5 s 2. p P I h t y 00 R. N ? 1 r o o e V i 5 A 5 i P .i 9 e s.O S o x '~; i s c c Of = cs o t cc e 4 R A W d '05 e g t d + UO t t r-t N.o t Sos 5.1 o cs 5,3067 ll Il iI II 2.92T1\\ l8 ei 2.1314/ ii i i q q, gq 2[ ~------li ---ll- - _i _ _ _ ____ ll 1i i II li ii i wK v o.co 14.1S15 is.39 n.yo

n. M 23.u s aSOS 23.t g y d. f I m

TABLE 5.2: BU-7 CONTAINER INFINITE ARRAY GEOMETRY MODEL (KENO /GEMER INPUT) Radius 1 Height or or Region Geometry Type Material iX 1Y 1Z l Cylinder Carbon Steel 14.2875 1 0.05 2 Cylinder UO -H 0 Fuel Mbomre 14.2875 1 35.05 2 2 3 Cylinder Carbon Steel 14.34 1 35.1 4 Cylinder Void 17.70 1 35.1 5 Cylinder Carbon Steel 17.808 35.5763 - 35.2087 6 Cylinder Phenolic Resin or 23.495 35.5763 - 42.8287 Interspersed Water 7 Cylinder Void or 23.495 36.688 - 42.8287 Interspersed Water 8 Cylinder Phenolic Resin or 28.575 44.308 - 42.8287 Interspersed Water 9 Cylinder Carbon Steel 28.575 44.4167 - 42.9374 10 Cylinder Void or 28.575 45.3692 - 44.8424 Interspersed Water .1 Cylinder Carbon Steel 28.684 45.3692 - 44.8424 12 Cuboid Void or +28.684 + 28.684 45.3692 ~ Interspersed Water - 44.8424 13 Core Void 128.684 1 28.684 45.3692 - 44.8424 14 Cuboid Void 128.684 1 28.684 45.3692 - 44.8424

Dimensions in cm c:;' L n

) TABLE 5.3: GEOMETRY MODEL MODIFICATIONS FOR 35 KG ( UO CALCULATIONS (KENO /GEMER INPUT) 2 Region Geometry Type Material Radius + 1 Height 1* Cylinder Carbon Steel 14.2875 + 0.05 1A Cylinder Void 14.2875 0.05 A 2 Cylinder UO -HO 14.2875 B -35.05 2 2 Fuel Mixture 2A Cylinder Void 14.2875 35.05 -35.05 3 Cylinder Carbon Steel 14.34 + 35.1 Fuel Mixture Height of+ No. Fuel in Container A, B, 1 12.128 - 22.922 12.178 2 20.0 - 15.05 20.05 3 35.0 0.05 35.05 Unchanged + Dimensions in cm )k i O 9( TABLE 5.4: GEOMETRY MODEL MODIFICATIONS FOR 8 x 8 x 4 FINITE ARRAY (KENO /GEMER INPUT) Region Geometry Type Material 1 X 1 Y IZ 12* Cuboid Carbon steel + 28.684 + 23.684 45.3692 13 Core Void + 229.472 +229.472 +180.4232 14 Cuboid Full Density + 260.0 +260.0 +212.0 Water (or concrete) 9( Unchanged + Dimensions in cm ,b ) [J FIGURE 5.2 - FIVE-GALLON PROCUCT CONTAINER GEOMETRY MODEL ^ /v A. SINGLE CONTAINER (FGC) ID = 28.575 cm 00 IH = 35.0 cm 2 + OD = 28.680 cm HO OH = 35.1 cm 2 Walls - carbon steel B. TWO FIVE-GALLON CONTAINERS Side-by-side Stacked i l' H O reflector l'(min)H O reflector 2 2 FGC FGC l w I FGC I / void side view FGC ) FGC FGC FGC j l' H O reflector l' H O reflector 2 2 -19A-

y gOCh P,M ON C - a* , ggg ^CggUog 0 s 9 ;- l* 8 0 il i; 1 ~ t. n., !i tl j. ,t. ? [ej, .{ ,i ,i 8l .;g. .,i, l..} i' }g, 14! i ! ' j, }a F. - .8 t - g' l e;t. ll,i'

i' i,tl, ii 5!*; i.

.,.i l, . e,. J. ,i, J ll .i .? .: +. _ .I 6 . [;. 9, ,;1.!:1 I. { .t igy-r ,1 ! i It. u } ,,s _4 1 0 1 x S ' n e... -.-,, e. ,4 4: 4 3. U ? -/. C 0 1 ,i. g il, .l.; i, lt,r

3. gg hg

!i; ,s ? l{-l ,6 +.. - t I i. l . ] {- {l;, 1{g, ,.)e ..,. -. i, e ;i g o i ~ - t a 8l64il ii. 6l. j ;. -...: .. 84 R n a t l. 4j. ,t A S U / 4 . i . 8l.

6.

i - e C '3 0 ~ l.li ,al. ,g;,j j- !-lg,. g' . 4 ' i r, x 5 / U.- C- ~ .i,, .l f;

t n

/ 7&.

1.. i,

0 9,.. ;. I. ...}. 1 l [ 1 1 1 l oDI 8 =

i Tight reflection of the 256 unit array was modeled by 12-inch thick slabs of full density water on all six sides of the array. For the case of concrete reflection, the 12-inch thick slabs were replaced with 16-inch thick concrete slabs (KENO IV material number 300). One aspect of the Figure 5.1 geometry model that should be noted is that the dimensions used are conservative as compared to the actual BU-7 container described in Figures 4.1 and 4.2. This especially applies to the use of the 22.5 inch inner diameter for the maximum size of the 55 gallon drum rather than taking credit for the 23 inch diameter of the drum nrovided by the two or three corrugations along the length of the container. This constitutes a reduction by at least 4 % in the diameter and 9% in the volume of the drum and is a significant factor of conservatism in the analysis of the 256 unit accident array. This reduction of 9% in the volume conservatively simulates the collapsing of the rolling heaps on the lateral surface of the drums under the postulated accident conditions (drop, flame, flooding). It is advised that the geometry model used in this analysis for the BU-7 container is different from that used in the Reference 3 analysis. The Figure 5.1 model is more con- ){ servative than the one previously used. t 5.3 Five Gallon Product Container Geometry Model The five gallon product containers have been modeled in this analysis as shown in Figures 5.2. The ID = 28.575 cm, IH = 35.0 cm dimensions slightly overestimate the true size of a five gallon product container (the value is 22.44 liters as compared to the true value of less than 22.0 liters), and the model is therefore conservative, especially since the carbon steel walls are modeled as being less than 0.0207 inches thick.

6.0 RESULTS 6.1 BU-7 Container Analysis Tables 6.1 through 6.5 show the results of the MERIT / GEMER/ KENO IV calculations for the BU-7 container. 6.1.1 Normal Case TABLE 6.1 NORMAL CASE Kms for BU-7 CONTAINER PERCENT OF FULL DENSITY I # OF PHENOLIC RESIN GEMER MERIT KENO IV 100 0.758 1 0.004 0.753 1 0.004 0.790 t 0.004 80 0.799 1 0.004 0.804 1 0.003 0.843 1 0.004 60 0.853 1 0.004 0.850 1 0.003 0.903 1 0.003 with 202 Kgs UO2 per BU-7 container These results show that the normal case infinite array of BU-7 containers is critically safe and that the phenolic resin serves as an "overmoderating" influence in that the more reshi present the lower than K.. Comparison of MERIT, GEMER and KENO show that MERIT and GEMER are in good agreement but that KENO overpredicts the K s relative to them by from five to six per cent.

/ -

t ( 6.1.2 Accident Case - Optimum Interspersed Water i j .1 Infinite Arrays These calculations were performed in order to l compare MERIT /GEMER and KENO. (The MERIT geometry package is unable to model the 256 unit finite array.) TABLE 6.2 - K. FOR BU-7 CONTAINER WITH OPTIMUM INTERSPERSED WATER

K.

+o INTERSPERSED WATER (gm/cc) GEMER MERIT KENO IV 0.000 1.111 1 0.003 1.106 1 0.003 1.163 1 0.003 0.025 1.147 1 0.003 1.147 1 0.003 1.182 1 0.004 0.050 1.117 1 0.003 1.116 1 0.003 1.153 1 0.004 ( 0.075 1.067 1 0.003 1.099 1 0.004 0.100 1.021 1 0.003 1.046 1 0.003 0.200 0.829 + 0.003 0.848 1 0.004 0.500 0.634 1 0.004 0.642 1 0.004 1.000 0.610 1 0.004 0.617 1 0.004 With 202 Kg UO2 per BU-7 container

Interspersed water in Regions 6, 7, 8, 10 and 12 (Table 5.2)

'){ t TABLE 6.3 - K. FOR BU-7 CONTAINER WITH CLOSE s/ PACKED OPTIMUM INTERSPERSED WATER KENO IV Interspersed Water (gm/cc) 1 = 0.000 1.163 1 0.004 0.025 1.185 1 0.003 0.050 1.144 + 0.004 0.075 1.065 1 0.004 0.100 1.008 1 0.004 0.200 0.792 + 0.004 0.500 0.641 1 0.005 1.000 0.657 1 0.004 t With 202 Kg 002 per BU-7 container

Interspersed water in Region 4 as well as in Regions 6, 7, 8, 10 and 12 (Table 5.2)

Table 6.2 indicates the same trends as shown in Table 6.1. GEMER and MERIT are in good agreement but KENO IV overpredicts the K s relative to them by three to five per cent in the region around optimum interspersed moderation. Table 6.3 indicates that, as is to be expected, a slight shift may exist in the density of interspersed water corresponding to optimum moderation, but the impact on the K s is smaller than the Monte Carlo statistical uncertainties. This is evi-dence that the addition of hydrogen anywhere outside of the UO, fuel has been implicitly considered by analyzing the BU-7 container arrays for optimum interspersed moderation between containers (and within the 55 gallon drums). /s .J l .2 Single Container 9( To provide a further comparisen between MERIT, GEMER and KENO IV, the Keff of a single.BU-7 container was calculated. The conditions for this calculation were 202 Kg U0 in the container and 0.075 gm/cc 9 of water in Regions 6, 7, 8, 10 and 12 (see Table 5.2). The results were: Code eff i GEMER 0.355 1 0.004 MERIT 0.356 1 0.003 i KENO IV 0.356 1 0.004 .3 Accident Case - 8 x 8 x 4 Arrays of BU-7 Containers The GEMER and KENO IV results for the analysis of the 8 x 8 x 4 arrays of BU-7 containers with optimum interspersed water are given in Tables 6.4 and 6.5. Table 6.4 is for the case f( in which the BU-7 containers each hold 202 Kg UO (full five-gallon product pails at 4.5gm U0 /cc) while Table 6.5 contains the results e fo the containers limited to 70 Kg U0 each 9 (35 Kg UO2 per five-gallon product paiI). . (9 ( LJ

j .I s i TABLE 6.4 - K s for 8 x 8 x 4 ARRAY eff OF BU 7 CONTAINERS (202 Kg UO PER CONTAINER) 2 E Interspersed eff 1 Water (gm/cc) GEMER KENO IV 0.000 0.853 1 0.004 0.025 0.884 g 0.004 0.906 1 0.004 0.050 0.924 1 0.004 0.955 1 0.005 0.'075 0.928 1 0.005 0.944 1 0.004 0.100 0.929 1 0.005 0.200 0.802 1 0.003 0.500 0.637 + 0.004 1.000 0.617 0.005

The array is tightly reflected on all six sides by 12 inches of water.

No interspersed water is placed in Region 4 (see Table 5.2) s U\\ t TABLE 6.5 - K,ggs for 8 x 8 x 4 Array r-of BU-7 Containers (70 Kg (-)x (' U0 Per Container) 2 KENO IV Keff i# Height in Height in Height in Interspersed can of can of Can of Wnter(qm/cc) 12.128 cm 20.0 cm 35.0 cm(Full) 0.000 0.534 + 0.004 0.530 1 0.003 0.532 1 0.003 l 0.025 0.609 + 0.004 0.624 + 0.005 0.655 1 0.005 0.050 0.637 + 0.004 0.679 + 0.004 0.731 + 0.004 0.075 0.656 + 0.004 0.693 + 0.004 0.750 + 0.005 0.100 0.641 1 0.004 0.681 + 0.005 0.743 + 0.004 0.200 0.537 + 0.004 0.573 + 0.004 0.623 + 0.004 0.500 0.419 + 0.004 0.410 + 0.004 0.427 + 0.004 I 1.000 0.417 + 0.004 0.406 + 0.004 0.401 + 0.005 ()(.075 I 0.149 + 0.002 0.231 + 0.002 0.351 + 0.003 ~ ~ Single BU Cbntainer

The array is tightly reflected on all sides by 12 inches of water.

No interspersed water is placed*in Region 4 (see Table 5.2). 4 s ()L 4 4 .____n m_,.

It is concluded from those two tables that the BU-7 container ( array is critically safe under the postulated optimum inter-spersed moderation, full reflection accident condition even if the individual BU-7 container mass limit of 70 Kg UO is exceeded. This assumes that the H/U = 1.577 and C/U = 21.262 limits are still met. As in the previous cases, the KENO IV results around the optimum interspersed water level are one to three per cent higher than the corresponding GEMER values. (The 8 x 8 x 4 array cannot be modeled in MERIT due to geometry limitations.) The Keff for the 8 x 8 x 4 array with optimum interspersed water and full reflection and with the 70 Kg 00 limit per 2 container is 0.750 1 0.005 (at 0.075 gm H 0/cc interspersed 9 water.) For comparison, this case was analyzed replacing the tight water reflector by a tight 16-inch thick concrete reflector (on all six sides). The KENO IV Keff for this case was 0.789 1 0.004, an increase of 5.2%. 6.2 EVALUATION OF CARBON ADDITIVES From Reference 8, the relative moderating factor for a mixture of water and carbon can be determined to be: l h/ ( Moderating factor = 20 NH + 0.76 Nc + 0.50 No hydrogen,, Nc, and No are the corresponding atom densities for where N carbon, and oxygen in the moderator. It follows from this relationship that the worth of carbon as a moderator is 0.76

20 = 0.038 times the worth of hydrogen. Applying this value to the mixt,ure of U0 water and hydrogen-carbon additives which is approved fo$,the BU-7 container, (an H/U atomic ratio of 1.577 and a C/u atomic ratio of 1.262) then results in an equivalent UO2 - U 0 mixture with 51438 ppm H O as opposed 2

2 to the 50,000 ppm H O limit for the H/U ratio of 1.577. 2 The effect of the additional 1438 ppm H O equivalence can be estimated from existing tabulated data 2(Reference 6) to be less than 1.0% in K. However, as part of the present analysis of the BU-7 container, additional calculations have been made using the KENO I7 Monte Carlo code to evaluate the effect of carbon on 4.01 enriched U0, systems. The results of these are given in Tables 6.6 throu%h 6.10. t ,,,{ ,/ TABLE 6.6 K, s of U(4.05) 0 - Carbon Systems 2 s Weight Fraction of Carbon in C/U-235 KD0 IV Mixture Atcmic Patio K, + o 0.00 0.0 0.806 + 0.002 0.10 61.6 0.814 T 0.002 0.20 138.7 0.803 7 0.002 0.30 237.8 0.778 T 0.002 0.40 369.9 0.775 I 0.002 0.50 554.9 0.788 T 0.002 0.60 832.4 0.809 7 0.003 0.70 1294.8 0.867 7 0.003 0.80 2219.6 0.936 7 0.003 0.85 3144.4 1.056 7 0.003 0.875 3884.3 1.122 7 0.003 0.90 4994.1 1.196 7 0.003 0.925 6843.7 1.303 7 0.003 0.95 10543. 1.359 7 0.003 0.975 21641. 1.438 T 0.003 ( 0.982 30273. 1.448 T 0.003 ~ 0.990

54935, 1.377 0.003

'Ihe thcoretical density of carbon was taken to be 2.25 gms/cc e

Q,2 J (maII6.7 ommud CRITICAL b" ASSES OF U(4.05)0,, - H O CARBON SYSTDE 2 KDD IV calc. Weight Fraction Weight Fraction C/U-235 Min. Critical of H O of Carbon Atamic Ratio Mass of UO (K9) 2 2 0.0 0.975 21641 140.9 0.982 30273 128.1 0.990 54935 147.4 0.0 0.00 2208 0.05 22.84 1954.5 30.0 1658.0 200.0 861.3 1000.0 419.8 0.0 0.00 337.5 0.10 22.84 277.6 200 262.3 1000 164.0 0.0 0.00 101.0 '~' { 0.20 22.84 104.9 't) 200 108.9 1000 93.7 0.0 0.00 74.4 0.30 22.84 70.9 200 76.7 1000 101.8 0.0 0.00 65.9 0.40 22.84 66.2 200 73.2 1000 331.6 0.00 68.6 0.0 + 0.50 22.84 73.5 200 96.9 P = 2.25 gWec c t Water reflected -s(g ( i v&( TABLE 6.8 b2001 CRITICAL MASSES OF U(4.05) 0 - H O SYSTDE 2 2 KENO IV Calculated Weight Fraction H/U Mini.rtIn Critical of H 0 Atcmic Ratio bbss of UO2 (K9) 3 0.05 1.577 2208. 0.10 3.330 337.5 0.20 7.492 101.0 0.30 12.84 74.4 0.40 19.98 65.9 0.50 29.97 68.6 0.60 44.95 113.7 0.70 69.92 1770. 0

UL

'%./, )

b n e m TABLE 6.9: MERIT VERIFICATION OF KENO IV UO MINIMUM CRITICAL MASSES 2 C/U-235 Weight Fraction Critical UO2 Critical MERIT Atomic Ratio of Water Radius Mass (Kg) Keff 1 0 0.30 20.98 74.4 1.0031 1 0.0042 0 0.40 22.84 65.9 1.0041.1 0.0039 0 0.50 26.14 68.6 0.9941 1 0.0033 22.84 0.30 21.12 70.9 0.9895 1 0.0048 22.84 0.40 23.34 66.2 1.0019 1 0.0043 22.84 0.50. 27.23 73.5 1.0016 + 0.0034 1000 0.10 36.24 164.0 0.9926 1 0.0048 1000 0.20 33.01 93.7 0.9963 1 0.0042 1000 0.30 37.16 101.8 0.9819 1 0.0039 See Table 6.7 I

TABLE 6.10 - BU-7 CONTAINER ANALYSIS WITH CARBO!! $C A. Normal case K, with 60% of full density phenolic resin (202 Kg U02 per BU-7 container) KENO IV K,without carbon 0.903 1 0.003 KENO IV K,with carbon 0.913 1 0.005 B. Accident case: 8 x 8 x 4 water reflected array with 70 Kg UO per BU-7 2 Density of Interspersed H30 KENO IV K KENO IV K gg) eff e (gm/cc) (without carbon (with carbon 0.025 0.655 1 0.005 0.663 1 0.004 (' . _( 1 0.050 0.731 1 0.004 0.731 1 0.004 g 0.075 '0.750 1 0.005 0.757 1 0.005 0.100 0.743 1 0.004 0.745 1 0.004 C/U = 1.262 licight of fuel in five gallon product pails is 35.0 cm (.g The K. results in Table 6.6 can be compared with the tabulated (K.ralues in Reference 6 for U(4.0) 02 - H2O in which the maximum is no greater than 1.40. Figure 6.1 is a plot of the Table 6.6 results. In addition, if all the moderator in the U0 7 moderator mixture in the BU-7 containers were carbon, TabIe 6.6 indicates that the K. of the fuel would be less than 0.8. (An H/U ratio of 1.577 and C/u ratio of 1.262 imply an effective "C/U" ratio of 42.737 when using the 0.038 equivalence factor between carbon and hydrogen). The K. o f a U ( 4. 0 ) 02-HO 2 mixture with 40000 ppm H O (a H/U ratio of 1.577) is greater 2 than 1.0. Tables 6.7 and 6.8 show minimam critical masses calculated with KENO IV for 'U(4.05) 02 - H 0-C and U(4.05) 0 - U 0 systems. 2 2 2 These two tables indicate that the minimum critical mass occurs for pure UO -H O mixtures and that the presence of carbon there-2 2 fore results in dilution of the fuel mixture. Table 6.7 cicarly establishes however that carbon moderation can be appreciable for under moderated systems such as the BU-7 container. In this regard, the entries in Table 6.7 for 0.05 weight fraction of water indicate the impact of the C/U = 1.262 BU-7 container limit. With no carbon, the minimum critical mass at the H/U ratio of 1.577 (i.e., 0.05 weight fraction water) is 2208 Kg 002 With a mixture containing carbon with a C/U-235 ratio of 30, (an H/U of about 1.2), the critical mass decreases to 1657.7 Kg U02, a (33%effect. 73 Table 6.9 presents a verification of the KENO IV UO minimum 3 critical masses which was performed with the MERIT Ronte Carlo code. The MERIT code was used to calculate the K gg of the e UO2 spheres determined to be critical with KENO IV (via the search option). The results show excellent agreement between MERIT and KENO IV for these U0 - H 0-carbon systems. 2 2 Finally, Table 6.10 summarizes the results of KENO IV calcula-tions for the BU-7 container normal case and accident case analyses described in Section 6.1 with the addition of carbon in the fuel mixtures. The C/U ratio for these calculations is 1.262. As can be seen, the addition of the carbon increases the K. and K gg values by no more than 1.25%. In both cases, o the,DU-7 container system is still suberitical. [ ) (- s_/ 6.3 Analysis of five Gallon Product Pails ( The safety of individual BU-7 containers has been analyzed by calculating the effective neutron multiplication factors of two five gallon product pails under conditions of optimum moderation and full reflection. The results of these calcula-tions are shown in Tables 6.11 and 6.12. Table 6.11 gives the results of KENO IV calculations for two five gallon containers placed-side by side (and touching) with tight water reflection in all areas except immediately between the two containers. The maximum K for this case are: effs 0.968 1 0.006 for 65.8 Kg U0 Per container 2 and 0.909 1 0.006 for 35.0 Kg UO2 per container Table 6.12 gives the results of calculations for the two five gallon containers stacked in a vertical column. Again, the containers are touching and the assembly is tightly reflected by at least 12 inches of water. The maximum K f r the effs vertical arrangement are: ( 0.964 1 0.005 for 65.8 Kg UO2 per container and 0.904 1 0.004 for 35.0 Kg U02 per container Since the BU-7 shipping container is limited to 35.0 Kg per five gallon product pail, the criticality safety of an indivi-dual container is established for the case of optimum moderation and full reflection. 34 - sj

TABLE 6.11 - ANALYSIS OF TWO FIVE GALLON CONTAINERS SIDE BY SIDE A. Full Containers with Maximum UO Masses 2 KENO IV Weight Fraction Mass of UO 2 of II 0 in Fuel in Single Keff + 2 Container (Kg) 0.05 156.0 0.805 + 0.004 0.10 110.9 0.890 7 0.005 0.20 65.8 0.968 7 0.006 0.30 43.2 0.947 7 0.006 0.40 29.6 0.909 7 0.005 0.50 20.6 0.841 { 0.003 D. Containers with 35 Kg U0 Mass Limits 2 Weight Fraction KENO IV K9ggs Intermediate of !! 0 in fuel Minimum licigfit !!cight Full cans 2 in cans in cans 35.0 cm $( 0.05 0.581 + 0.004 0.538 + 0.004 0.534 + 0.004 ~ ~ (127128 cm) (20.0 cm) 0.10 0.639 + 0.005 0.579 + 0.004 0.537 + 0.004 ~ ~ (12 128 cm) (20.0 cm) 0.20 0.801 + 0.005 0.746 + 0.004 0.688 + 0.004 ~ (187624 cn) (25.0~cn) 0.30 0.885 + 0.005 0.851 + 0.004 ~ ~ (20 370 cn) 0.40 0.909 + 0.005 (35~0 cm) 0.50 0.841 + 0.003 (35 0 cm) ~ TABLE 6 12 - ANALYSIS OF TWO FIVE GALLON CONTAINERS STACKED VERTICALLY A. Full Containers with Maximum 00 Masses 2 O T @n Weight Fraction Mass of UO2 in of II 0 in Fuel Single container bff 1 'i ff I 2 0.05 156.0 0.80410.004 0.10 110.9 0.90210.006 0.20 65.8 0.96410.005 0.955_+0.004 0.953_M.006 0.30 43.2 0.95410.005 0.40 29.6 0.90410.004 0.50 20.6 0.85010.005 B. Cbntainers with 35 Kg UO Miss Limits 2 IG20 IV Keffs Weight Praction Minimum fielght Intermediate Full Cans of !! 0 in Fuel in Cans fielght in Cans (lleight=35.0cn) 2 0.05 0.586+0.005 0.550 + 0.004 0.519 + 0.004 (12.T28 cm) (20.6 cm) ~ C' ( 0.10 0.633M.004 0.578 + 0.005 0.536 + 0.005 (12.I28 cn) (20.6 cm) ~ 0.20 0.793 + 0.003 0.736 + 0.005 0.678 + 0.005 (18.674 ct) (25.0 cm) ~ 0.30 0.881 + 0.005 0.851 + 0.005 (28.370 an) ~ 0.40 0.904 + 0.004 (34.0~cm) 0.50 0.850 + 0.005 ~ (35.0 cn) ~~' ( v

The Kegg = 0.909 1 0.005 and 0.904 1 0.004 results listed above constitute upper limits for extreme accident conditions since ( the moderation limit in the containers is limited by BU-7 specifi-cations to 50,000 ppra H2O or less. (50,000 ppm is the same as a weight fraction of 0.05.) In Table 6.12 Keff results have also been presented for MERIT and GEMER calculations of the vertically stacked assembly with 65.8 Kg 002 (weight fraction of water = 0.20). The MERIT and GEMER results for this case are in excellent agreement and are about 1% lower than the KENO IV result. Finally, it is noted that the presence of carbon in these containers has been found in Section 6.2 to increase the Koffs by no more than 1.25% provided that the H/U = 1.577 and C/U = 1.262 limits are met. The conditions analyzed in Tables 6.11 and 6.12 would in such accident conditions still correspond to a C/U = 1.262 case but the H/U ratio would exceed 7.5 (see Table 6.8). In this case the pre-sence of the low level of carbon would have an even smaller effect on the system K ggs. Nevertheless, if the system Koggs were to e increase by 1.25%, the two 5 gallon containers with 35 Kg 002 in either geometry arrangement would still be critically safe since most K gg, would be no higher than 0.920. e G( -s _.) __s 36-

6.4 Evaluation of Rocky Flats Low Enriched Low Moderation U 0 38 Benchmark Critical Experiments 9( Reference 7 describes a set of benchmark critical experiments that were performed by Rockwell International (Rocky Flats Plant) to provido data for low enriched Uranium Oxide systems with low levels of moderation. The Rocky Plats experiments consisted of a 5X5XS array of Aluminum tins which contained 4.4G% enriched U 03 8 powder and for which the average hydrogen content in the entire assembly resulted in an II/O ratio of 0.77. Ten different casun were run for the critical experiments corresponding to the type of fully enriched Uranium Driver (metal, low Uranium content solution or high Uranium content solution) and to the type of reflector (con-croto, metal or plastic). Measured amounts of water were added to the U308 in the Aluminum tins through drilled holes (56 per tin). The measured critical paramotor in the experiments was the separation distance between halves of the 125 unit array. Both KE!10 IV and GEMER calculations have boon performed for the Rocky Plats experiments with very detailed modeling of the assem-blics in regular and enhanced KEtiO IV geometrics. The major area in which the geometry modals differed in the true configuration was in the smearing of the holes in the Aluminum tins which were used to add the monsured amounts of wator. The impact of this smearing has boon evaluated however by analy::ing the K of a single Aluminum tin with and without the Aluminum hole,s. From { KEt10 IV with onhanced geometry these results aro For single oxido can K, = 1.0838 1 0.0040 without holes (" smeared") For single oxido can K, = 1.0830 1 0.0053 with holen ("unsmeared") Any difference is completely masked by the 0.3 to 0.5% statistics. Tablo 6.13 shows the results of the KE!10 IV and GEMER calculations for the Rocky Flats experiments. Canos 1-3 woro not performod with GEMER because of geomotry modoling difficultion. (Thoso casos re-quiro the use of the enhanced goomotry option not currently availablo in GEMER.) The results of the benchmark calculations aro that KEt10 IV predicts an averago K gg = 0.997 1 0.002 and GEMER predicts an averago K ggg 1.003 1 0.00 9t ( / TABLE 6.13 - KENO IV AND GEMER CALCULA O IS FOR ROCKY FLATS LOW ENRICHED U 0 3 -6 LOW MODERATION BENCHMARK CRITICAL EXPERIMENTS EXPERIMENT eff A-NO. DRIVER REFLECTOR KENO GEMER 1 Metal Concrete 1.0060+0.0057 2 Metal Plastic 0.9931+0.0064 3 Metal Steel 1.0075+0.0067 4 High Uranium Concrete 0.9948+0.0052 0.9961+0.0060 Content Solution 5 High Uranium Plastic 0.9984+0.0052 1.0115+0.0059 Content Solution i 6 High Uranium Steel 0.9819+0.0055 ? Content Solution 0.9816+0.0082 7 Low Uranium Concrete 0.9950+0.0048 1.0219+0.0087 Content Solution 8 Low Uranium Plastic (Spacing 1) 0.9981+0.0045 1.0045+0.0064 Content Solution 9 Low Uranium Plastic (Spacing 2) 0.9970fp.0050 1.01381,0.0079 Content Solution 10 Low Uranium Steel 0.997919 0051 0.9898+0.0080 Content Solution Average values 0.997+ 0.002 1.003 + 0.003 l i

e 1 REFERENCES 1. Y-DR-51, " Criticality Analysis of Bulk Uranium Oxide Shipping Container," J. T. Thomas 2. GE-BU-4-1, Rev. 1, " Criticality-Safety Analysis of General Electric's BU-4 Shipping Container for the Transportation of Dry Unirradiated Uranium Dioxide," R. Artigas, 1971 3. NEDO-ll277, "The General Electric Model BU-7 Uranium Shipping Container - Criticality Safety Analysis," R. Artigas, 1974 4. ORNL-4938, " KENO IV, An Improved Monte Carlo Criticality Program," L. M. Petrie & N. P. Cross, 1975 5. LAMS-2543, "Six and Sixteen Group Cross Sections for Past and Intermediate Critical Assemblics," G. E. Hansen & W. H. Roach 6. ARH-600, " Criticality Handbook - Volume II," Atlantic Richfield llanford Company 7. NUREG/CR-0674, " Benchmark Critical Experiments on Low-Enriched Uranium oxide Systems with H/U = 0.77," Systems Group, August 1979 8. Glasstone, S and Edlund, M.C., "The Elements.of Nuclear Reactor }( Theory," Von Nostrom, 1952, pp. 145-146 -w T .;j ~39-

... i Appendix A. Mixture Densities 8( A.1 Fuel Mixtures A.2 Phenolic Resin and Carbon Steel A.3 Interspersed Water .i TABLE A.1 UO -II 0-C MIXTURE DENSITIES 2 2 3c A. 4.5 gm UO2/cc + 0.23684 gm !!2 /cc Mixtures 0 Material MERIT /GEMER KEt:0 IV !! ANS EN-ROACl! Atom Density Atom / Material 16 Group (atoms / barn-cm) Dorisi ty (atoms / Material ID barn-cm) U-235 4.0657 E-04 4.0657 E-04 92508 U-238 9.6344 E-03 9.6344 E-03 92810 Oxygen 2.8001 E-02 2.00828 E-02 0100 Ily trogen 1.58365 E-02 i Water 0.237269 502 Carbon 1.26692 E-02 6100 (Optional) '( Use: 101 Kg U02 in 5 gallon container occupying entire volume of can (height = 35 cm) or 35 Kg 002 in 5 gallon container occupying minimum volume of can (height = 12.128 cm) 0.23604/0.9982, which is.the KEMO input density (gm/cc a in thin caso - not atomn/ barn-cm). -41

r s I -~ h,.

2. 72 8 8 gm UO 2/cc + 0.14 362 gm !! 0/cc 2

MATERIAL MERIT /GEMER KE!!O IV !! ANSEll-RO ACl! Atom Density Atom / Material 16 Group (a toms /ba rn-cm) Density (atoms / Material ID barn-cm) U-235 2.46546 E-04 2.46546 E-04 92508 U-238 5.84235 E-03 5.84235 E-03 92810 0xygen 1.69800 E-02 1.21783 E-02 8100 liydrogen 9.60334 E-03 0.143881* 501 Water Uso: 35 Kg UO, in 5 gallon contoiner occupying pattial volumo oE can (hcight = 20.0 cm) = KENO input density (gm/cc in thits case - not atomn/ barn-cm).

e. 4

/C 1.5593 gm UO /cc + 0.08207 gm !!2 /cc 2 0 MATERIAL MERIT /GEMER KENO IV !!ANSEN-ROACil Atom Density Atom / Material 16 Group (atoms / barn-cm) Density (atoms / Material ID barn-cm) U-235 1.40883 E-04 1.40883 E-04 92508 U-238 3.33849 E-03 3.33849 E-03 92810 0xygen 9.70284 E-03 6.95903 E-03 8100 Ilydrogen 5.48763 E-03 Water 0.0822179 502 Carbon 4.39009 E-03 6100 Uno: 35 Kg 002 in 5 gallon containor occupying ontiro volumo of can (hotght r-35 cm) f KEMO input donutty (gm/cc in thin cano - not atomn/ barn-cm). s ..o r FULL T!!EORETICAL DENSITY U0 -11 0 MIXTURES 2 2 l. KENO Mixtures Atom / Material Density (Atoms / barn-cm) WP 1120 U-235 U-238 Oxygen Water (Material) (Material) (ttatorial 8100) (Material 502) 0.10 4.46492 E-04 1.058505 E-02 2.20548 E-02 0.550088 (92509) (92818) 0.20 2.64765 E-04 6.27409 E-03 1.30783 E-02 0.733941 (92510) (92825) 0.30 1.73810 E-04 4.11875 E-03 8.58547 E-03 0.824960 (92511) (92831) 0.40 1.19208 E-04 2.82485 E-03 5.88836 E-03 0.881201 (92512) (92835) 0.50 8.27944 E-05 1.9619 E-03 4.08969 E-03 0.918040 (92512) (92840) Oxygon - Material (,,( ) Wator - Matorial 2. MERIT /CE!!ER Mixturo WP !! 0 = 0. 20 2 Material Atom Density (atomn/ barn-cm) U-235 2.64765 E-04 U-238 6.27409 E-03 Oxyqon 3.75717 E-02 flydrogon 4.89868 E-02 t Partial donnity atom donnition aro dotormined by the ratio of tho height of the fuol in the containor to tho height of theoretical donnity mixtura in containor divided into tho donnition in Tablo D.L KE!!O input donnity (qm/cc in this cano - not atomn/ barn-en). -4..

..oo Pl!ENOLIC RESIN AND CARBON STEEL 8 BLE A2 A. Phenolic Rosin Material Full Density 80% Density 60% Density (atoms / barn-cm) !!ydrogen 3.0140 E-03 2.4112 E-03 1.8084 E-03 B-10 4.2688 E-05 3.4151 E-05 2.5613 E-05 B-11 1.6726 E-04 1.2581 E-04 9.4356 E-05 Carbon 2.3050 E-03 1.8440 E-03 1.3830 E-03 Nitrogon 5.2890 E-05 4.2312 E-05 3.1734 E-05 0xygon 2.0510 E-03 1.6408 E-03 1.2306 E-03 t 1.997 E-04 1.5976 E-04 1.1982 E-04 Boron Carbon Stool ,,(B. 1 Material Density (atomc/ barn-cm) Carbon 3.921 E-03 Iron 8.3491 E-02 Matorial 100 1.0000 (llannon-Roach) ' KENO IV Material -4'-

.o* f, LEA.3 INTERSPERSED WATER DENSITIES KENO Material' MERIT /GEMER Densities Density (atoms / barn-cm) Hydrogen Oxygen 0.010 6.6866 E-04 3.3433 E-04 0.025 1.67173 E-03 8.35816 E-04 0.050 3.3433 E-03 1.6716 E-03 0.075 5.01489 E-03 2.50745 E-03 0.100 6.6866 E-03 3.3433 E-03 0.200 1.3373 E-02 6.6866 E-03 h ( 0.500 3.3433 E-02 1.6716 E-02 1.000 6.6866 E-02 3.3433 E-02 t Matorial 502 G( s- _

9 APPLICATION FOR REVISION OF NRC CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE USA /9019/B()F FOR TIIE BU-7 TRANSPORT PACKAGE m. ENCLOSURE 1C ( ) CRITICALITY SAFETY ANALYSIS OF TIIE BU-7 S!!IPPING PACKAGE FOR URANIUM OXIDE PELLETS o \\ /

NEDO-11277 74NED7 CLASS 1 February 1974 h r l THE GENERAL ELECTRIC MODEL BU-7 URANIUM StilPPING CONTAINER - CRITICALITY SAFETY ANALYSIS i i Ricardo Artigas

O(

l 1 l ) l' Approved i D Wilson, Manager Radioactive Matenals Safety Assurance e 4 I i l PHODUCI & OH A L IIY ASbHH AfJCL Of E lf AIlOf4 # GE fil H At. f (( C IIHC COfJI' AfJ Y S Afd JObl, C Al is OHfel A US t.'d l G E N E R A L () E LE CTR I C

. - =. NEDO 11277 DISCLAIMER OF RESPONSIBILITY This report was prepared as an account of research and development work pur. formed by General Electnc Company. It is being made available by General Electric Company without consideration in the interest of promoting the spread of technical knowledge. Neither General Electric Company nor the ondovidual author: A. Afakes any warranty or representation, expressed or emphed, noth respect to the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of the information contained on this report, or that the use of any information disclosed on this report inay not uninnge g privately owned rights; or W B. Assumes any responsibihty for IsabiMy or damage which may result from the use of any informat on disclosed in this repart. 4 4 I OL 0 hl

NEDO 11277 O( TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION - 1 ANALYSIS SCOPE-1

SUMMARY

AND CONDITIONS - 1 6 PACKAGE DISCRIPTION. 2 TECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS. 3 RESULTS-3 REFERENCES 5 DISTRIBUTION.. 7 i O( i l i OL l ) s

NEDO 11277 /mU( ABSTRACT 1 The General Electric Model BU-7 Shipping Container has been shown to meet the specsfac criticahty standards for a Fissile Class i Package as required on Title 10 Part 71 of the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission's Code of Federal Regulations (10CFR71). Each BU-7 container os restncted by the results of :he analysis to contain limited quantities of dry, untrradiated urantum compounds ennched up to four percent in the U-235 Isotope. The KENO Monte Carlo cnticahty code was used with a mod.fied Hansen and Roach 16 Group set of cross sections on the analysis. INTRODUCTION General Electric now uses the Model BU-5 shipping container for the transportation of low-enriched, unirradiated, uranium oxides. The GE Model BU 5 contains a solid insulating medium called VPAC, an acronym for vermiculite, plyamine and powdered ammonium chlonde catalyst. In order to lighten the net weight of the container,and thus effect savings in the cost of transporting the fuel, a phenolic resin has been proposed as a substitute insulating medium The phenolic resin has a density of approximately 8 pounds per cubic foot. The GE Model BU-7 sh'pping container is thus identical to the GE Model BU 5, except that a lighter phenotic resin insulation is used instead of the VPAC insulation. ANALYSIS SCOPE To demonstrate that the GE Model BU-7 package meets the specific cnticality salety standards for a Fissile Class I package as required by Part 71, Title 10, of the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission's Code of Federal Regulations.

SUMMARY

AND CONDITIONS The results demonstrate that the GE Model BU-7 shipping container meets the specific standards of the U S. l Atomic Energy Commission's Title 10 Part 71 for a F:ssile Class I package when used for the transportation of dry, unirradiated, low-ennched, uranium compour,ds. The GE Model BU-7 and the insulating mixture are to be as described in the Package Description section of this report. The insulating mixture shall have a density of 81 1 pounds / cub.: foot. The fuel content of each pachage (BU-7)is to be restricted as follows: Enrichment: Uranium ennched up to a maximum of 4*w in the U-235 isciope. Moderation: Dry uranium compounds A maximum hydrogen-to-uranium ratio of 0 45, con-sidering all sources of hydrogenous moderators in the inner containment. v Physical Form: Uranium compstinds in the forrn of powder, peilets or powder-pellet mixtures. l 1

NEDO 11277 O( Contents: Not to exceed the lesser of: e,- (1) Two safe batches (90% of a minimum cntical mass) of UO, as a function of the maximum ennchment and physical composition' (powder or pellets) of the uranium in the container, or (2) 89 kilograms of total contents.D 8 The safe catcn values for peliets snart be used whenever a cornoinanon of powder and peilets is present

The es maogra n hrnit.s not a criticality linet but or.e based on the load drop tested PACKAGE DESCRIPTICH The BU-7 inner containment is a nominal 16-gallon Department of Transportation (DOT) Specification 17H drum constructed of 18-gauge steel, modified by the welded attachmerit of a closure flange to accept a 3/16-inch thick steel tid which is gasketed for resistance to high temperature and is attached by twelve 5/16-inch steel bolts. The inside dimensions of the inner containment drum are 13.75 inches in diameter by 27 inches high The outer containment is a nominal 55-gation, DOT Specification 17H 18 gauge steel drum,22.,82 inches outer diameter and 36 5 inches high.

The space between the concentnc inner and outer containers is completely filled with a solid insulating med;um-phenotic resin. The phenotic resin is the same as that used in the FL-10-1 package, and the SA and 30AB overpacks. The resin has a density of 8 1 pounds / cubic foot. Its chemical composition is shown in Table 1. Of V( Table 1 CHEMICAL COMPOSITION OF THE PHENOLIC RESIN INSULATION 0 Elemental Weight Percent

Organic Compounds - Weight Percent Ctrbon..

. 41.0% Union Carbide Phenolic Resin BRL2760.. . 65.8% l Hydrogen.. 4.5 % Silicone Surfactant LS30.. 2 0. Boron.. 32% Boric Anhydride B-203. 8.2% Silicon.. 22% Anhydnde Oxalic Acid.. 82% Freon 113.. 66% Chlonite. 05% Nitrogen.. ~0 Fiberglass Roving.. 96% I l Fluonne.. -0 N Oxygen. .48 6%

Densey. 8 t 1 in/cutac toot t

The uranium is cornained in two nominal 5 gatton pails. or two or more nominal 2 5 gallon pails, fabricated of minimum 24-gauge steel The pails have an inside diamter ci 11.25 inches and are vertically stacked in the inner l containment et each BU-7. l l l

NEDO 11277 3 (O (. TECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS The KENO' Monte Carlo criticality code was used for the computations with a Knight-med fied' Hansen and Roach 2 set of cross sections obtained from Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Tests

performed by the General Electric Company demonstrate that the capacity of a 5-gallon can is 84 kilograms of randomly stacked pellets, indicating a void fraction of approximately 62% We have, therefore, very conservatively, assumed for computational purposes that each 5-gallon can is full of about 85 kilograms of 4% enriched UO, pellets.

Note that in reahty the maximum amount of 4%-enriched pellets to be allowed in any 5-gallco can is 24 7 kilograms - a safe batch. Since the pellets, which come from a dry environment, are loaded into the essentially dry inner containment of the BU-7, there is practically no hydrogenous moderation present between the fuel lumps. Therefore, pellets in the 5-gallon cans are considered to be a homogeneous mixture, with a density of 4 2 grams UO,/cc [p theoretical UO, x (1 void fraction)] This homogeneous mixture density also covers cans full of powder, since the density of UO, powder will not exceed 4 2 grams UO,/cc. The fuel mixture number densities corresponding to 4% ennched UO, at an H to-o ratio of 0 45 are given in Table 2. Table 2 NUMBER DENSITIES OF FUEL MIXTURE Number Density, ( At' ms/ Barn-cm Element o U-235.. .00003796 9 U 238. .0008996 O (in fuel).. .00187 H. .0 0042165 O (in water).. .0002108 Since the H/U ratio is constant, the value of up (barns per absorber atom) is also constant A <sp of 29.5 barns per U 238 atom was computed. A conservative value of 12 barns per U-238 atom was used in the calculations. This low value will underestimate the resonance absorptions in U-238 and yielJ larger values of the multiplication constant. The BU 7 was represented in the KENO computer program by the same geometric model used in the analysis of the BU-5 package.$ RESULTS Normal Conditions of Transport e -/{ The reactivity of an infinite array of undamaged BU 7's loaded with approximately 171 kilograms of dry, 4'.-ennched UO, (number densities as gisen in Table 2). was shown to be subtritical under two sets of conditions. t insulating rnisture with a density of s pounds / cubic foot k = - 0 55L:17

0 0054 (1.r)

NEDO 11277 Ob 2. Insulating mixture with a density of 7 pounds / cubic foot - kx = 0 57659 0.00487 (to). The number densities of the insulating mixtJres as used in the analysis are given in Table 3. Accidental Conditions An array of 256 (8 x 8 x 4) BU-7's. loaded as above and fully water-retlected. was shown to be subcritical under conditions of optimum inter-unit moderation. } For the analysis of the accident conditions, no credit was taken at all for the insulating mixture, and the spaces in between inner containments, not occupied by steel. were assumed to contain water of vanous densities. The reactivity of the fully water-reflected array is given in Table 4 as a function of inter. unit water density. It can be seen from the table that the maximum reactivity for the array occuis at an inter unit water density of 0.125 grams /cc, and it is less than 0 81. Table 3 NUMBER DENSITIES OF THE INSULATING MIXTURE Density = 8 lb/ft) Density =. 7 lb/ft8 of insulation of Insulation 0 0 Number Density Number Density Element Atoms / Barn-cm Element Atoms / Barn-em Carbon.. . 2.634 x to 2 Carbon.. . 2.305 x 10-2 Hydrogen.. . 3.445 x 10-2 Hydrogen.. . 3.014 x 10-2 I Boron.. . 2.282 x 10

Boron..

.1.997 x 10-* Silicon.. . 6 044 x 10 $ Silicon.. .5 289 x 10-5 Chionne. .108P x 10 $ Chlonne. . 9.520 x 10-5 Oxygen.. . 2.344 x 10 2 Oxygen.. . 2.051 x 10-2 Table 4 Keff OF FULLY WAUR REFLECTED ARRAY OF 256 (8 x 8 x 4) BU-7'S ) inter-Unit H,0 Density, gm/cc 99% Confidence Interval 0 25 0.67615 to 0 72590 0 125 0 77043 to 0 80995 4~ 1 0 05 0 71741 to 0 77316 l 0025 0 61876 to 0 69431

1 l l NEDO 11277 l h REFERENCES 1. G. E. Whitesides and N. F. Cross, " Keno - A Multigroup Monte Carlo Cnticahty Program," CTC 5, Oak Ridge f Computing Technology Center (1969). 2. G. E. Whilesides, KENO Cross Section Library. j 3 G. E. Hansen and W. H. Roach "Six and Sixteen Group Cross Sections for Fast and intermediate Critical Assembhes," LAMS-2543. Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory. 4. Internal Document, General Electnc Company, San Jose, Cahfornia (1967) 5 License No. SNM-54 (Docket #701007), Appendix D. Modification 18, Apnl 14,1972, Table V (p.1-65) and Figure 16 3 (p 1 - 69). I 7O( ) l I I 1 l Ot b J

NUCLEAR ENERGY DIVISION e GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY

3 SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA 95125 GENER AL h ELECTRIC TECHNICAL INFORMATION SERIES 1

llILE PAGE l AUTHOR SUBJECT NO. 74NED7 Ricardo Artigas Shipping Container DATE TITLE GE CLASS The General Electric Model BU-7 Uranium i Shipoing Container - Criticality Safety COVT. CLASS Analysis None REPRODUCIDLE COPY FILED AT TECHNICAL PUBLICATIONS, R&UO. SAN JOSE, CALIFORNI A

SUMMARY

GE Model BU-7 Shipping Container meets cnticality standards of 10CFR71. Report states the calculational methods used in, testing the container. O By cutting out this rectangle and folding on the center line, the above inforrnation can be litted into a stJndard card file. NED DOCUMENT NUMBER NEDO-11277 " '9 # " ' ' ' " INFORMATION PREPARED FOR flicardo Artigas TESTS MADE BY COUNTER $1GNED 2' " SECTION - MSA BUILDING AND ROOM NO. I LOCAT10N San Jose CA-}}

ML20205H833

Text

Dear Mr. MacDonald:

Subject:

Reference:

1.0 INTRODUCTION

*2<s.s n, m g :r =

_I

1.0 INTRODUCTION

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

Navigation menu

Search