ML22306A113

NAC, Safety Analysis Report, TRISO Application

ML22306A113
Person / Time
Site:	07109390
Issue date:	10/31/2022
From:	NAC International
To:	Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards
Shared Package
ML22306A108	List: ML22306A109 ML22306A113
References
ED20220158, EPID L-2022-LLA-0142
Download: ML22306A113 (1)

Text

October 2022 Revision 22A OPTIMUS-L (OPTImal Modular Universal Shipping Cask)

SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT TRISO Application NON-PROPRIETARY VERSION Docket No. 71-9390 Atlanta Corporate Headquarters: 3930 East Jones Bridge Road, Norcross, Georgia 30092 USA Phone 770-447-1144, Fax 770-447-1797, www.nacintl.com

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK to ED20220158 Page 1 of 3 Enclosure 1 No. 71-9390 for OPTIMUS-L Proposed Changes for Revision 2 of Certificate of Compliance TRISO Application NAC OPTIMUS-L SAR, Revision 22A October 2022 Page 1 of 3 to ED20220158 Page 2 of 3 CoC Sections (revised)

CoC Page 2 of 6 5.(a)(3) Drawings (continued) 70000.14-L502, Rev0 Packaging Assembly - OPTIMUS-L 70000.14-L510, Rev0 CCV Assembly - OPTIMUS 70000.14-L511, Rev0 CCV Body Weldment - OPTIMUS 70000.14-L512, Rev0 CCV Lid - OPTIMUS 70000.14-L513, Rev0 Port Cover - OPTIMUS 70000.14-L514, Rev0 CCV Bottom Support Plate - OPTIMUS-L 70000.14-L540, Rev0 Outer Packaging Assembly - OPTIMUS-L 70000.14-L541, Rev0 Outer Packaging Base - OPTIMUS-L 70000.14-L542, Rev0 Outer Packaging Lid - OPTIMUS-L 70000.14-L550, Rev0 1-Inch Shield Insert Assembly (SIA) - OPTIMUS 70000.14-L551, Rev0 21/4-Inch Shield Insert Assembly (SIA) - OPTIMUS 70000.14-L553, Rev0 21/4-Inch SIA Annular Spacer Plate - OPTIMUS-L 70000.14-L560, Rev0 GEO Basket Assembly, OPTIMUS-L 70000.14-L561, Rev0 GEO Basket Weldment, OPTIMUS-L CoC Sections (new)

CoC Page 3 of 6 5.(b)(1) Type and form of material (continued)

(vi) TRISO Compacts, consisting of unirradiated solid right circular cylinders meeting the following specifications.

Parameter TRISO Fuel Maximum total weight 581 pounds (263 kg)

Maximum enrichment 20% U-235 Total mean uranium loading 68 kgU Maximum mean matrix density 1.8 g/cc Page 2 of 3

Enclosure 1 to ED20220158 Page 3 of 3 CoC Page 5 of 6 5.(b)(2) Maximum quantity of material per package (continued)

(viii) For TRISO Compacts, as described in Item 5.(b)(1)(vi):

TRISO Compacts, contents, are limited to fresh (unirradiated) fuel, and have no appreciable decay heat load. The OPTIMUS-L packaging is configured with the GEO basket assembly inside the CCV cavity when used to transport TRISO compact contents, as shown in General Arrangement Drawing 70000.14-L502.

The GEO basket assembly is an internal support structure that maintains the geometry of the TRISO compact contents for criticality control under NCT and HAC shown in General Arrangement Drawing 70000.14-L560. In this configuration, the CCV bottom support plate is not included. TRISO Compacts shall be shipped dry (i.e., no free liquids).

CoC Page 5 of 6 5.(c) Criticality Safety Index For, 5.(b)(2)(i) thru 5.(b)(2) (vii) 5.0 For, 5.(b)(2) (viii ) TRISO fuel 0.0 CoC Page 5 of 6

11. Transportation by air is authorized for packages (except items specifically prohibited for air transport, e.g., fissile material)

Page 3 of 3

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK to ED20220158 Page 1 of 2 Enclosure 2 List of Calculations TRISO Fuel Initial Amendment Request and NAC OPTIMUS-L SAR, Revision 22A October 2022 to ED20220158 Page 2 of 2 List of Calculations

1. 70000.14-2108 Rev. 0

2. 70000.14-3002 Rev. 0

3. 70000.37-6001 Rev. 0

4. 70000.37-6002 Rev. 0 CALCULATIONS ARE PROPRIETARY AND WITHHELD IN THEIR ENTIRETY PER 10 CFR 2.390 to ED20220158 Page 1 of 3 Enclosure 3 List of SAR Changes NAC OPTIMUS-L SAR, Revision 22A (Docket No 71-9390)

NAC International October 2022 to ED20220158 Page 2 of 3 List of Changes for the OPTIMUS-L SAR, Revision 22A Chapter 1

• Pages 1-i thru 1-ii, modified Table of Contents, List of Figures and List of Tables to reflect changes within the chapter where indicated.

• Page 1.1-1, modified text in the first and third paragraphs and added new fourth paragraph in Section 1.1 where indicated.

• Pages 1.2-1 thru 1.2-9, globally deleted metric measurements throughout text in sections 1.2.1, 1.2.1.1, 1.2.1.3, 1.2.1.5, 1.2.1.11 and 1.2.1.13 where indicated.

• Pages 1.2-2 thru 1.2-3, added four paragraphs where indicated.

• Page 1.2-4, added text at the beginning of Section 1.2.1.4 where indicated.

• Page 1.2-5, added text near the middle of the page in Section 1.2.1.5 where indicated.

• Pages 1.2.1-6 thru 1.2.1-9, added new paragraph to Section 1.2.1.7 where indicated.

• Page 1.2.1-10, text flow changes.

• Page 1.2.1-11 thru 1.2.1-12, added new Section 1.2.2.3 where indicated.

• Pages 1.2.1-13 thru 1.2.1-16, text flow changes.

• Page 1.2.1-17, added new Figure 1.2-3 where indicated.

• Page 1.3-2, added new acronym near the bottom of the page where indicated.

• Page 1.3-3, added new drawings where indicated.

Chapter 2 Pages 2-ii, 2-iv and 2-vi, modified Table of Contents, List of Figures and List of Tables to reflect changes within the chapter where indicated.

Page 2-1, added text to the end of the first paragraph in Section 2 where indicated.

Page 2.6-16, editorial change from 90-degrees to 90 in the last paragraph of Section 2.6.7.1 where indicated.

Page 2.7-1, deleted text in the first paragraph of Section 2.7 where indicated.

Page 2.12-3, added new References 2.29, 2.30 and 2.31 at the end of Section 2.12.1 where indicated.

Pages 2.12-4 thru 2.12-10, text flow changes.

Pages 2.12-11 thru 2.12-51, added new Section 2.12.5 where indicated.

Chapter 3 Pages 3-i thru 3-iii, modified Table of Contents, List of Figures and List of Tables to reflect changes within the chapter where indicated.

Page 3-1, modified text in Section 3 where indicated.

Page 3.1-1, added new paragraph to Section 3.1 where indicated.

Pages 3.1-2 thru 3.1-4, text flow changes.

to ED20220158 Page 3 of 3 Page 3.5-5, added new Section 3.5.2.4 where indicated.

Pages 3.5-6 thru 3.5-7, text flow changes.

Chapter 4 Page 4.2-1, added text to the end of Section 4.2.1 where indicated.

Page 4.3-1, added text to the end of Section 4.3.1 where indicated.

Page 4.5-13, modified text in Item 2, part b, including inserting Footnote a, where indicated.

Page 4.5-15 thru 4.5-16, editorial change moving Item 1 to keep with following text, causing text flow changes where indicated.

Page 4.5-18, modified text in Item 2, part b, including inserting Footnote a, where indicated.

Page 4.5-21, modified text in Item 2, part b, including inserting Footnote a, where indicated.

Page 4.5-24, modified text in the first row of Table 4.5-2 where indicated.

Chapter 5 Page 5.1-2, modified text in the first full paragraph on the page and added the last paragraph on the page where indicated.

Page 5.2-1, modified text in the first paragraph of the page and added new paragraph at the end of Section 5.2 where indicated.

Chapter 6 Pages 6-i, 6-ii, 6-iv, 6-vi and 6-vii, modified Table of Contents, List of Figures and List of Tables to reflect changes within the chapter where indicated.

Page 6.9-1 thru 6.9.8-7, added new Section 6.9 where indicated.

Page 6.10-1, renumbered Section 10 headings where indicated due to the insertion of new Section 6.9.

Page 6.10-2, added new references 6.16 thru 6.21 where indicated.

Chapter 7 Page 7-i, modified List of Figures to reflect changes within the chapter where indicated.

Page 7-1, modified text in the fourth paragraph of Section 7 where indicated.

Page 7.5-2, modified Title of Attachment 7.5-1 where indicated.

Pages 7.5-21 thru 7.5-23, modified text throughout Attachment 7.5-3 where indicated.

Page 7.5-24, modified text in Table 7.5-3 and the table Notes; added new Figure 7.5-2 where indicated.

Chapter 8 No changes.

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK to ED20220158 Page 1 of 4 Enclosure 4 List of Drawing Changes TRISO Fuel Initial Amendment Request and OPTIMUS-L SAR, Revision 22A October 2022 to ED20220158 Page 2 of 4 Drawing 70000.14-L502, Packaging Assembly - OPTIMUS-L, Rev. 0P Initial Submittal Drawing 70000.14-L502, Packaging Assembly - OPTIMUS-L, Rev. 0NP Initial Submittal Drawing 70000.14-L510, CCV Assembly - OPTIMUS, Rev. 0P Initial Submittal Drawing 70000.14-L510, CCV Assembly - OPTIMUS, Rev. 0NP Initial Submittal Drawing 70000.14-L511, CCV Body Weldment - OPTIMUS, Rev. 0P Initial Submittal Drawing 70000.14-L511, CCV Body Weldment - OPTIMUS, Rev. 0NP Initial Submittal Drawing 70000.14-L512, CCV Lid - OPTIMUS, Rev. 0P Initial Submittal Drawing 70000.14-L512, CCV Lid - OPTIMUS, Rev. 0NP Initial Submittal Drawing 70000.14-L513, Port Cover - OPTIMUS, Rev. 0P Initial Submittal Drawing 70000.14-L513, Port Cover - OPTIMUS, Rev. 0NP Initial Submittal to ED20220158 Page 3 of 4 Drawing 70000.14-L514, CCV Bottom Support Plate - OPTIMUS, Rev. 0P Initial Submittal Drawing 70000.14-L514, CCV Bottom Support Plate - OPTIMUS, Rev. 0NP Initial Submittal Drawing 70000.14-L540, Outer Packaging Assembly - OPTIMUS-L, Rev. 0P Initial Submittal Drawing 70000.14-L540, Outer Packaging Assembly - OPTIMUS-L, Rev. 0NP Initial Submittal Drawing 70000.14-L541, Outer Packaging Base - OPTIMUS-L, Rev. 0P Initial Submittal Drawing 70000.14-L541, Outer Packaging Base - OPTIMUS-L, Rev. 0NP Initial Submittal Drawing 70000.14-L542, Outer Packaging Lid - OPTIMUS-L, Rev. 0P Initial Submittal Drawing 70000.14-L542, Outer Packaging Lid - OPTIMUS-L, Rev. 0NP Initial Submittal Drawing 70000.14-L550, 1-Inch Shield Insert Assembly (SIA) OPTIMUS, Rev. 0P Initial Submittal Drawing 70000.14-L550, 1-Inch Shield Insert Assembly (SIA) OPTIMUS, Rev. 0NP Initial Submittal to ED20220158 Page 4 of 4 Drawing 70000.14-L551, 21/4-Inch Shield Insert Assembly (SIA) OPTIMUS, Rev. 0P Initial Submittal Drawing 70000.14-L551, 21/4-Inch Shield Insert Assembly (SIA) OPTIMUS, Rev. 0NP Initial Submittal Drawing 70000.14-L552, 33/4-Inch Shield Insert Assembly (SIA) OPTIMUS, Rev. 0P Initial Submittal Drawing 70000.14-L552, 33/4-Inch Shield Insert Assembly (SIA) OPTIMUS, Rev. 1NP Initial Submittal Drawing 70000.14-L553, 21/4-Inch Shield Insert Assembly (SIA)Annular Spacer Plate -

OPTIMUS, Rev. 0P Initial Submittal Drawing 70000.14-L553, 21/4-Inch Shield Insert Assembly (SIA)Annular Spacer Plate -

OPTIMUS, Rev. 0NP Initial Submittal Drawing 70000.14-L560, GEO Basket Assembly, OPTIMUS-L, Rev 0P Initial Issue Drawing 70000.14-L560, GEO Basket Assembly, OPTIMUS-L, Rev 0NP Initial Issue Drawing 70000.14-L561, GEO Basket Weldment, OPTIMUS-L, Rev 0P Initial Issue Drawing 70000.14-L561, GEO Basket Weldment, OPTIMUS-L, Rev 0NP Initial Issue to ED20220158 Page 1 of 1 Enclosure 5 List of Effective Pages and SAR Changed Pages NAC OPTIMUS-L SAR, Revision 22A (Docket No 71-9390)

NAC International October 2022

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK October 2022 Revision 22A OPTIMUS-L (OPTImal Modular Universal Shipping Cask)

SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT NON-PROPRIETARY VERSION Docket No. 71-9390 Atlanta Corporate Headquarters: 3930 East Jones Bridge Road, Norcross, Georgia 30092 USA Phone 770-447-1144, Fax 770-447-1797, www.nacintl.com

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK OPTIMUS-L Safety Analysis Report October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A List of Effective Pages Chapter 1 Page 3.3-1 thru 3.3-20.................. Revision 0 Page 1-i thru 1-ii ..................... Revision 22A Page 3.4-1 thru 3.4-18.................. Revision 0 Page 1-1 ....................................... Revision 0 Page 3.5-1 thru 3.5-4.................... Revision 0 Page 1.1-1 ............................... Revision 22A Page 3.5-5 thru 3.5-7............... Revision 22A Page 1.1-2 .................................... Revision 0 Page 1.2-1 thru 1.2-17............. Revision 22A Chapter 4 Page 1.3-1 .................................... Revision 0 Page 4-i thru 4-ii .......................... Revision 0 Page 1.3-2 thru 1.3-3............... Revision 22A Page 4-1 ....................................... Revision 0 Page 4.1-1 thru 4.1-3.................... Revision 0 Page 4.2-1 ............................... Revision 22A 15 drawings (see Section 1.3) Page 4.3-1 ............................... Revision 22A Page 4.4-1 .................................... Revision 0 Chapter 2 Page 4.5-1 thru 4.5-12.................. Revision 0 Page 2-i ........................................ Revision 0 Page 4.5-13 ............................. Revision 22A Page 2-ii .................................. Revision 22A Page 4.5-14 .................................. Revision 0 Page 2-iii ...................................... Revision 0 Page 4.5-15 thru 4.5-16........... Revision 22A Page 2-iv ................................. Revision 22A Page 4.5-17 .................................. Revision 0 Page 2-v ....................................... Revision 0 Page 4.5-18 ............................. Revision 22A Page 2-vi ................................. Revision 22A Page 4.5-19 thru 4.5-20................ Revision 0 Page 2-1 .................................. Revision 22A Page 4.5-21 ............................. Revision 22A Page 2.1-1 thru 2.1-20.................. Revision 0 Page 4.5-22 thru 4.5-23................ Revision 0 Page 2.2-1 thru 2.2-11.................. Revision 0 Page 4.5-24 ............................. Revision 22A Page 2.3-1 thru 2.3-4.................... Revision 0 Page 2.4-1 .................................... Revision 0 Chapter 5 Page 2.5-1 thru 2.5-14.................. Revision 0 Page 5-i thru 5-iii ......................... Revision 0 Page 2.6-1 thru 2.6-15.................. Revision 0 Page 5-1 ....................................... Revision 0 Page 2.6-16 ............................. Revision 22A Page 5.1-1 .................................... Revision 0 Page 2.6-17 thru 2.6-37 ................ Revision 0 Page 5.1-2 ............................... Revision 22A Page 2.7-1 ............................... Revision 22A Page 5.1-3 thru 5.1-4.................... Revision 0 Page 2.7-2 thru 2.7-52.................. Revision 0 Page 5.2-1 ............................... Revision 22A Page 2.8-1 .................................... Revision 0 Page 5.2-2 thru 5.2-4.................... Revision 0 Page 2.9-1 .................................... Revision 0 Page 5.3-1 thru 5.3-8.................... Revision 0 Page 2.10-1 .................................. Revision 0 Page 5.4-1 thru 5.4-20.................. Revision 0 Page 2.11-1 .................................. Revision 0 Page 5.5-1 thru 5.5-22.................. Revision 0 Page 2.12-1 thru 2.12-2................ Revision 0 Page 2.12-3 thru 2.12-51 ......... Revision 22A Chapter 6 Page 6-i thru 6-ii .................... Revision 22A Chapter 3 Page 6-iii ...................................... Revision 0 Page 3-i thru 3-iii .................... Revision 22A Page 6-iv ................................. Revision 22A Page 3-1 .................................. Revision 22A Page 6-v ....................................... Revision 0 Page 3.1-1 thru 3.1-4............... Revision 22A Page 6-vi thru 6-vii ................. Revision 22A Page 3.1-5 .................................... Revision 0 Page 6-1 ....................................... Revision 0 Page 3.2-1 thru 3.2-5.................... Revision 0 Page 6.1-1 thru 6.1-2.................... Revision 0 Page 1 of 2

OPTIMUS-L Safety Analysis Report October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A List of Effective Pages (contd)

Page 6.2-1 thru 6.2-4.................... Revision 0 Page 6.3-1 thru 6.3-23.................. Revision 0 Page 6.4-1 thru 6.4-15.................. Revision 0 Page 6.5-1 thru 6.5-18.................. Revision 0 Page 6.6-1 thru 6.6-20.................. Revision 0 Page 6.7-1 .................................... Revision 0 Page 6.8-1 thru 6.8-20.................. Revision 0 Page 6.9-1 ............................... Revision 22A Page 6.9.1-1 thru 6.9.1-2......... Revision 22A Page 6.9.2-1 thru 6.9.2-2......... Revision 22A Page 6.9.3-1 thru 6.9.3-19....... Revision 22A Page 6.9.4-1 ............................ Revision 22A Page 6.9.5-1 ............................ Revision 22A Page 6.9.6-1 ............................ Revision 22A Page 6.9.7-1 ............................ Revision 22A Page 6.9.8-1 thru 6.9.8-7......... Revision 22A Page 6.10-1 thru 6.10-2........... Revision 22A Chapter 7 Page 7-i ................................... Revision 22A Page 7-1 .................................. Revision 22A Page 7-2 thru 7-3.......................... Revision 0 Page 7.1-1 thru Page 7.1-5 ........... Revision 0 Page 7.2-1 thru 7.2-2.................... Revision 0 Page 7.3-1 thru 7.3-2.................... Revision 0 Page 7.4-1 .................................... Revision 0 Page 7.5-1 .................................... Revision 0 Page 7.5-2 ............................... Revision 22A Page 7.5-3 thru 7.5-20.................. Revision 0 Page 7.5-21 thru 7.5-24 ........... Revision 22A Chapter 8 Page 8-i thru 8-ii .......................... Revision 0 Page 8-1 ....................................... Revision 0 Page 8.1-1 thru 8.1-5.................... Revision 0 Page 8.2-1 thru 8.2-8.................... Revision 0 Page 8.3-1 .................................... Revision 0 Page 2 of 2

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Chapter 1 General Description Table of Contents 1 GENERAL INFORMATION ......................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 1.1-1 1.2 Package Description..................................................................................................... 1.2-1 1.2.1 Packaging ................................................................................................... 1.2-1 1.2.2 Radioactive Contents ................................................................................. 1.2-9 1.2.3 Special Requirements for Plutonium ....................................................... 1.2-12 1.2.4 Operational Features ................................................................................ 1.2-12 1.3 Appendix ...................................................................................................................... 1.3-1 1.3.1 References .................................................................................................. 1.3-1 1.3.2 Glossary of Terms and Acronyms ............................................................. 1.3-2 1.3.3 Packaging General Arrangement Drawings............................................... 1.3-3 NAC International 1-i

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A List of Figures Figure 1.1 Expanded View of OPTIMUS-L Packaging ................................................. 1.1-2 Figure 1.2 CCV Packaging Components ........................................................................ 1.2-15 Figure 1.2 Packaging Containment System .................................................................... 1.2-16 Figure 1.2 GEO Basket Assembly .................................................................................. 1.2-17 List of Tables Table 1.2 TRU Waste FGE Limits .................................................................................. 1.2-13 Table 1.2 IFW Waste FEM Limits .................................................................................. 1.2-13 Table 1.2 TRU Waste and IFW Activity Limits for Key Isotopes ................................. 1.2-14 NAC International 1-ii

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR November 2021 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 0 1 GENERAL INFORMATION This chapter of the Safety Analysis Report (SAR) presents a general introduction to, and description of, the OPTImal Modular Universal Shipping cask for Low activity contents (OPTIMUS-L). An expanded view of the packaging is shown in Figure 1.1-1. Descriptions of the packaging, including the packaging features, contents, and operational features, are presented in Section 1.2. A glossary of the general terminology and acronyms used throughout this SAR is presented in Appendix 1.3.2. The packaging General Arrangement Drawings are included in Appendix 1.3.3.

As demonstrated by this SAR, the OPTIMUS-L package satisfies the regulatory requirements of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) regulations, namely Title 10, Part 71 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR 71).

NAC International 1-1

This page intentionally left blank.

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A 1.1 Introduction The OPTIMUS-L packaging is designated as Type B(U)F per 10 CFR 71.4. The package contents include Type B quantities of normal form transuranic (TRU) waste and fuel waste material. The packaging is classified as Category I in accordance with Regulatory Guide 7.11

[1.1]. The package is designed to be transported by highway, rail, sea and air (Transportation by air is authorized for packages (except items specifically prohibited for air transport, e.g., fissile material)). The consignor must ship the package under exclusive use controls. The Maximum Normal Operating Pressure (MNOP) of the package is 100 psig (690 kPa).

The packaging, described in greater detail in Section 1.2.1, consists of a Cask Containment Vessel (CCV), a CCV bottom support plate, and an Outer Packaging (OP) assembly, as shown in Figure 1.1-1. The CCV is a stainless steel vessel with a bolted closure designed to provide leaktight containment in accordance with the criterion of ANSI N14.5-2014 [1.2]. The CCV bottom support plate (not shown in Figure 1.1-1) is a free-standing carbon steel plate that is positioned at the bottom end of the CCV cavity below the contents. The OP consists of a base and lid bolted together to fully encase the CCV. The OP is designed to crush and absorb the impact energy when subjected to NCT free drop and HAC free drop tests, thereby limiting the loads imparted to the CCV. The OP also insulates the CCV from the direct effects of the fire during the HAC thermal test.

The packaging may be configured with a Shield Insert Assembly (SIA) inside the CCV cavity for contents requiring additional shielding to demonstrate compliance with dose rate limits. SIAs used in the OPTIMUS-L packaging are provided in 1-inch and 21/4-inch thicknesses. The SIA is a painted carbon steel open-top container for additional shielding for dose rates on the side and bottom of the package.

The packaging is configured with the GEO basket assembly inside the CCV cavity when used to transport unirradiated TRI-structural ISOtropic (TRISO) fuel particle compact (i.e., TRISO compact) contents. In this configuration, the CCV bottom support plate is not included.

SAR demonstrates the packaging meets the applicable requirements of 10 CFR 71. The basis for qualification is the safety analysis contained herein. The package is shown to comply with the external temperature limits of 10 CFR 71.43 and external radiation standards of 0 CFR 71.47(b),

10 CFR 71.51(a)(1) and 10 CFR 71.51(a)(2).

NAC International 1.1-1

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR November 2021 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 0 Figure 1.1 Expanded View of OPTIMUS-L Packaging NAC International 1.1-2

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A 1.2 Package Description 1.2.1 Packaging The OPTIMUS-L packaging consists of a Cask Containment Vessel (CCV), a CCV bottom support plate, and an Outer Packaging (OP) assembly. The CCV bottom support plate is a free-standing carbon steel plate positioned at the bottom end of the CCV cavity below the contents. The CCV fits within the cavity of the OP. An expanded view of the packaging components is shown in Figure 1.1-1. The packaging may also be configured with a Shield Insert Assembly (SIA) within the cavity of the CCV to provide additional shielding when required to demonstrate compliance of the contents with regulatory dose rate limits, as discussed in Attachment 7.5-1.

The CCV is the packaging containment system. It is a stainless steel cylindrical vessel that includes a body weldment, bolted lid, bolted port cover, and O-ring seals. An expanded view of the CCV assembly is shown in Figure 1.2-1. The CCV has an outer diameter of 34.5 inches, which expands to 39.0 inches at the bolt flange and lid, and an overall height of 51.38 inches.

The internal cavity of the CCV is 32.5 inches by 47.0 inches high; large enough to accommodate a 110-gallon drum. The CCV lid, which is , is fastened to the CCV body by socket head cap screws (e.g., CCV closure bolts). The CCV lid includes a port used for inerting the CCV cavity and contents, if required. A bolted port cover is used to seal the CCV port during transport. The CCV closure devices are discussed further in Section 1.2.1.5, Packaging Closure Devices.

The CCV bottom support plate is a free-standing coated carbon steel plate that is positioned at the bottom end of the CCV cavity below the contents. However, the CCV bottom support plate is not required when using the 1-inch SIA, as discussed below. The CCV bottom support plate is designed to spread the loading on the CCV bottom end plate from the CCV contents under NCT and HAC bottom end drop conditions. The CCV bottom support plate is discussed further in Section 1.2.1.5, Internal Support and Positioning Features.

The CCV is fully encased in the cavity of the cylindrical-shaped OP during transport. The OP has a 49.0-inch outer diameter and is 70.0-inch high, with a cavity that is sized to accommodate a CCV with sufficient radial and axial clearances to permit free differential thermal expansion of the CCV during NCT and HAC. The OP base and lid consist of energy-absorbing closed-cell polyurethane foam cores sealed inside stainless steel inner and outer shells. The OP is discussed further in Section 1.2.1.5, Energy-Absorbing Features. The OP lid is secured to the overpack base by high-strength steel bolts, as shown in Figure 1.1-1.

NAC International 1.2-1

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A The SIA is a coated carbon steel container inside the CCV cavity to provide supplemental gamma shielding. The SIA configurations used in the OPTIMUS-L packaging include only an open-top body, is provided in two (2) thicknesses; 1-inch and 21/4-inch thick. The internal cavity of the SIA is 24.0 inches by 35.25 inches high; large enough to accommodate a 55-gallon drum.

thick annular spacer plate placed underneath the bottom of the 21/4-inch thick SIA to position it near the top of the CCV cavity to facilitate loading operations.

The SIA is also not relied upon for thermal or containment functions. Although no structural credit is taken for the SIA in the structural evaluation of the other packaging components, the SIA is designed to withstand the most severe regulatory tests (e.g., free drop) without structural failure. Shielding integrity is maintained for those conditions where the SIA is credited in the shielding evaluation.

NAC International 1.2-2

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A 1.2.1.1 Overall Dimensions and Weights The nominal outer dimensions of the OPTIMUS-L packaging, excluding the lifting lugs and tiedown arms, is 49.0 inches by 70.0-inch high which is greater than the minimum package dimension of 10 cm required by 10 CFR 71.43(a). The gross weight of the package, including the maximum CCV contents weight, is approximately 9,200 pounds.

1.2.1.2 Containment Features The containment system is formed by CCV body (cylindrical shell, bottom plate, bolt flange, and all associated welds), CCV lid and its closure bolts and containment O-ring seal, and the port cover and its closure bolts and containment O-ring seal. A detailed description of the containment system is provided in Section 4.1.

1.2.1.3 Neutron and Gamma Shielding Features Gamma shielding on the side and bottom end of the packaging is provided primarily by stainless steel plates that form the CCV and OP inner and outer shells. The polyurethane foam on the side of the OP is only credited for shielding under NCT. The packaging radial surfaces includes the CCV stainless steel shell, the OP inner shell, and a OP outer shell, for a combined steel thickness of 1.27 inches. In addition, the minimum side foam thickness is included in the shielding model for NCT, but not for HAC. The NAC International 1.2-3

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A packaging bottom end includes the carbon steel CCV bottom support plate (positioned at the bottom end of the CCV cavity), the CCV stainless steel bottom plate, the 3 OP inner bottom plate, the OP bottom foam cover shell, and the 3/16-inch thick OP outer bottom plate, for a combined steel thickness of

. The packaging top end includes a 3 thick stainless steel CCV closure lid, a OP inner top end plate, the OP top foam cover shell, and the OP outer end plate, for a combined steel thickness of .

Shielding specifically for neutrons is not necessary for the specified radioactive material contents.

1.2.1.4 Criticality Control Features As discussed in Section 1.2.1.7, the GEO basket assembly supports and maintains the geometry of the TRISO compact to maintain subcriticality under NCT and HAC. Neutron absorbers for criticality control are not necessary for the specified radioactive material contents.

1.2.1.5 Structural Features The structural features of the packaging are summarized in this section. A more detailed discussion of the packaging structural features is provided in Chapter 2.

Lifting and Tiedown Devices The fully-assembled package is designed to be lifted by a forklift from a pallet on which the package is mounted or using a 3-legged sling attached to OP lid lifting lugs. The OP lid lifting lugs are structural parts of the packaging and are analyzed accordingly in Chapter 2.

Energy-Absorbing Features The OP lid and base, shown in Figure 1.1-1, absorb energy from free drops and protect the CCV from impact damage. The external envelope of the OP, excluding the lid lifting lugs and tiedown arms, is 49-inch by 70-inch high. The OP is constructed from closed-cell polyurethane foam encased inside stainless steel shells. The OP is designed to crush and absorb energy for NCT free drop, HAC free drop, and HAC puncture tests to limit the shock loads imparted to the CCV and its contents.

The OP base and lid are constructed from stainless steel shells that completely encase energy-absorbing closed-cell polyurethane foam core components to create a sealed cavity to protect the foam core from the external environment. The OP outer shells and outer top and bottom end plates are all constructed from stainless steel plate. The inner shells are constructed from stainless steel sheet. The inner top and bottom end plates are constructed from thick stainless steel plate. The OP shells are designed to NAC International 1.2-4

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A plastically deform under NCT and HAC free drop conditions, but not fail in any manner that would expose the OP foam to the ambient environment.

The OP foam cores are comprised of for optimal performance in the NCT and HAC free drop tests. The cores used in the top end of the OP does not provide an energy-absorbing function because it is not crushed under any NCT or HAC free drop conditions. All energy absorption is provided by the core used in the corner and overhang regions of the OP lid and base. The shear rings attached to the top inner end plate and the spoke support plate attached to the bottom inner end plate provide backing support for the corner foam under side, corner, and oblique drop impacts.

Internal Supports or Positioning Features The CCV bottom support plate is a free-standing plate that is positioned at the bottom end of the CCV cavity below the contents. The CCV bottom support plate is designed to distribute the loading from the contents on the CCV bottom end plate under NCT and HAC bottom end drop conditions. The CCV bottom support plate is not required when using the 1-inch SIA or the GEO basket assembly.

Shoring must be placed between loose fitting contents and the CCV cavity to prevent excessive movement during transport. The shoring may be made from any material that does not react negatively with the packaging materials or contents. Shoring materials should also have a melting temperature above 300°F (149°C) to ensure shoring maintains its geometry under routine and normal conditions of transport.

Outer Packaging As shown in Figure 1.1-1, the OP consists of a body and lid, each made from foam-filled stainless steel shells. The OP has a 49.0-inch outer diameter (excluding lifting lugs and tiedown arms) and 70-inch overall height. The OP lid is secured to the OP base by high-strength steel bolts. When installed, the inner portion of the OP lid bolt flange is recessed inside the top end of the OP base bolt flange. The tight fit between the OP lid and base bolt flanges at this interface is designed to provide shear relief for the OP bolts. The OP cavity is sized to provide sufficient clearance to permit free differential thermal expansion of the CCV under all NCT and HAC conditions.

NAC International 1.2-5

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Packaging Closure Devices The packaging closure devices include the bolted CCV lid, the bolted CCV port cover, and the bolted OP lid. The primary safety function of the CCV lid and CCV port cover is containment, but the OP lid is not part of containment boundary.

The CCV lid, shown in Figure 1.2-1, is a stepped plate secured to the CCV body by high strength stainless steel custom CCV lid bolts and sealed by an elastomeric O-ring. The design of the CCV lid prevents shear loading of the CCV lid bolt under NCT free drop, HAC free drop, and HAC puncture tests. The CCV lids inner plug, which fits tightly inside the top opening of the CCV body, prevents significant lateral movement of the CCV lid relative to the CCV body bolt flange to prevent shear loading of the CCV lid bolts. The CCV lid bolts are The CCV lid holes with scalloped pockets in which the CCV lid bolt heads are recessed and protected from impact loads.

During transport of the CCV port is plugged by the CCV port cover and sealed by an elastomeric O-ring. The CCV port cover is secured to the CCV lid by stainless steel socket head cap screws. The CCV port cover is recessed in a pocket within the CCV lid and protected from shear loading due to free drop and puncture tests.

1.2.1.6 Secondary Packaging Components As discussed in Section 1.2.2.1, radioactive contents are packaged in secondary containers (e.g.,

drums, equipment, liners, specialty bags, etc.) to prevent direct contact between the contents and packaging to minimize the spread of contamination and to facilitate content loading and unloading operations. In addition, shoring may be used to prevent significant movement of the radioactive contents within the CCV during transportation. Secondary packaging components are not considered licensed components but must be made from materials that do not adversely react with the packaging or component materials. Secondary containers may be any shape or size that fits within the cavity of the CCV. Each secondary container and each confinement boundary of the contents must have one or more venting mechanisms (e.g., filter, vent, permeable membrane, etc.) that satisfies the minimum hydrogen diffusivity rates in Table 4.5-3 to allow gases to readily flow into or out of each confinement region of the CCV and contents.

The hydrogen diffusivity rate of each venting mechanism shall be based on available product literature, published industry-accepted data, or test data, otherwise the minimum rates from Table 4.5-3 shall be assumed.

1.2.1.7 Internal Support Components NAC International 1.2-6

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A HAC.

1.2.1.8 Tamper-Indicating Features The OPTIMUS-L packaging has adjustable cable seal tamper indicating devices on the OP, as shown on general arrangement drawing 70000.14-L502 in Section 1.3, to meet the requirement for tamper-indicating features as specified in 10 CFR 71.43(b). See Section 2.4.2 for more details.

1.2.1.9 Packaging Markings The packaging nameplate is shown on the general arrangement drawing in Section 1.3.

1.2.1.10 Codes and Standards The codes and standards used for the packaging design, material specifications, fabrication, welding, and inspection are described throughout the SAR and summarized in this section. As discussed in Section 2.1.4, the package, which is designed to transport normal form content with a maximum activity greater than 3,000 A2 and greater than 30,000 Ci, is designed, fabricated, tested, and maintained in accordance with codes and standards that are appropriate for transportation packages with Category I container contents. Accordingly, the codes and standards used are based on Regulatory Guide 7.6 [1-3] and NUREG/CR-3854 [1-4].

The package containment system is designed in accordance with the applicable requirements of the ASME Code,Section III, Division 1, Subsection NB [1-5]. The non-containment structural components of the packaging are designed in accordance with the applicable allowable stress design criteria for plate- and shell-type Class 2 supports from the ASME Code,Section III, Division 1, Subsection NF [1-6]. However, the energy-absorbing foam materials used in the impact limiters are fabricated, installed, and tested in accordance with the applicable standard industry practices. Further discussion of the codes and standards used for the structural design of the packaging is provided in Section 2.1.4. Discussion of the codes and standards used for the fabrication, welding, and examination of the packaging is provided in Section 2.3.

NAC International 1.2-7

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A 1.2.1.11 Heat Transfer Features The packaging includes a A more detailed discussion of the package heat transfer features is provided in Chapter 3.

1.2.1.12 Containment Features The packaging has a simple, robust containment system design. Containment of radioactive material for the packaging is provided by the Cask Containment Vessel (CCV). Other than the CCV lid closure and port cover closure, there are no penetrations to the containment system, and no valves or pressure relief devices of any kind. The CCV does not rely on any filter or mechanical cooling system to meet containment requirements, nor does it include any vents or valves for continuous venting.

The CCV is comprised of a body weldment, bolted closure lid, bolted port cover, and the associated lid and port cover containment O-ring seals. A sketch of the CCV is included in Figure 1.2-2, with the pressure-retaining boundary outlined in red. The top view is simplified to only show the components significant to the containment system, removing details such as test ports, lifting hoist ring locations, and alignment pins.

O-rings with a continuous operating temperature range of -40F (-40C) to 400F (204C).

The CCV is designed, fabricated, examined, tested, and inspected in accordance with the applicable requirements of the ASME Code with certain exceptions discussed in Chapter 2. A detailed description of the containment system is provided in Section 4.1.

NAC International 1.2-8

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A 1.2.1.13 Neutron and Gamma Shielding Features Gamma shielding on the side and bottom end of the packaging is provided by stainless steel plates forming the CCV cylindrical shell and bottom plate plus the OP shells and foam. The packaging radial gamma shielding includes the stainless steel CCV cylindrical shell, the stainless steel OP inner and outer shell and the OP radial foam. The packaging bottom end gamma shielding includes the CCV stainless steel inner bottom plate and the stainless steel OP base inner and outer end plates. Gamma shielding in the top end of the cask is provided primarily by the stainless steel CCV lid, the stainless steel OP lid inner and outer end plates and the OP lid end foam. When required to demonstrate compliance with regulatory dose rate limits, the packaging is configured with an SIA. SIAs are only credited for shielding under NCT, conservatively assuming that the contents escape the secondary container and SIA cavity following the HAC free drop. Neutron shielding is not necessary for the specified radioactive material contents.

1.2.1.14 Coolants Not applicable.

1.2.2 Radioactive Contents The acceptable radioactive contents of the package includes transuranic (TRU) waste and irradiated fuel waste, consisting of LEU uranium fuel and metal structural components (e.g.

cladding, liners, baskets, etc.). The acceptable radioactive contents are discussed further in the following sections.

1.2.2.1 Transuranic Waste Transuranic (TRU) waste is classified as intermediate-level radioactive waste exposed to alpha radiation or containing long-lived radionuclides in concentrations requiring isolation and containment for periods beyond several hundred years. It typically requires shielding during handling and interim storage. This type of waste includes refurbishment waste, ion-exchange resins and some radioactive sources used in radiation therapy. TRU waste shall meet the following requirements and restrictions.

Type and Form of TRU Waste Material:

1. By-product, source, or special nuclear material consisting of process solids or resins, either dewatered, solid, or solidified.

2. Neutron activated metals or metal oxides in solid form.

3. Miscellaneous radioactive solid waste materials, including special form materials.

NAC International 1.2-9

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Maximum Quantity of TRU Waste Contents per Package:

1. Greater than Type A quantities of radioactive material in the form of solids or dewatered materials in secondary containers.

2. Greater than Type A quantities of radioactive material in the form of activated reactor components or segments of components of waste from a nuclear process or power plant.

3. That quantity of any radioactive material not generating spontaneously more than 100 thermal watts of radioactive decay heat.

4. TRU waste not exceeding the fissile gram equivalents (FGE) of fissile radioactive material in Table 1.2-1 for the specified criticality configuration limits.

5. TRU waste contents shall comply with regulatory dose rates, as demonstrated in accordance with Chapter 7, Attachment 7.5-1. Note: Maximum activity limits for key individual gamma-emitting contents (e.g., Co-60, Cs-137 and Ba-137m) and neutron-emitting contents (e.g., Cf-252 and Cm-244) are provided in Table 1.2-3 Loading Restrictions:

1. TRU waste contents shall be in secondary containers (e.g., drums or boxes).

2. TRU waste contents with a total decay heat exceeding 50 watts shall be inerted with helium gas.

3. Explosives, corrosives, non-radioactive pyrophorics, and sealed items containing compressed and/or flammable gas (e.g., aerosol cans, lecture bottles, etc.) are prohibited.

Pyrophoric radionuclides may be present only in residual amounts less than 1 wt%. All nonradioactive pyrophoric material be reacted (or oxidized) and/or otherwise rendered nonreactive prior to placement in a secondary container (e.g., drum).

4. Free liquids shall not exceed 1% of the CCV cavity volume.

5. Maximum weight of the CCV contents, including TRU waste, secondary containers, and internal structures (e.g., CCV bottom support plate, SIA, etc.) and dunnage or shoring shall not exceed 3,500 pounds (1,587 kg).

1.2.2.2 Irradiated Fuel Waste The materials in Irradiated Fuel Waste (IFW) are restricted to low enriched uranium (LEU) fuel and metal structural components (e.g., cladding, liners, baskets, etc.) meeting the following requirements and restrictions.

NAC International 1.2-10

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Type and Form of IFW Waste Material:

1. LEU fuel.

2. Activated metal structural components (e.g., cladding, liners, baskets, etc.).

Maximum Quantity of IFW Contents per Package:

1. Greater than Type A quantities of radioactive material in the form of LEU fuel.

2. Greater than Type A quantities of radioactive material in the form of activated metal structural components (e.g., cladding, liners, baskets, etc.).

3. That quantity of any radioactive material not generating spontaneously more than 100 thermal watts of radioactive decay heat.

4. IFW not exceeding the Fissile Equivalent Mass (FEM) limits from Table 1.2-2 for the specified criticality configuration limits.

5. IFW contents shall comply with regulatory dose rates, as demonstrated in accordance with Chapter 7, Attachment 7.5-1. Note: Maximum activity limits for key individual gamma-emitting isotopes (e.g., Co-60, Cs-137 and Ba-137m) and neutron-emitting isotopes (e.g., Cf-252 and Cm-244) are provided in Table 1.2-3.

Loading Restrictions:

1. IFW contents shall be in secondary containers (e.g., drums or boxes).

2. IFW contents with a total decay heat exceeding 50 watts shall be inerted with helium gas.

3. Free liquids shall not exceed 1% of the CCV cavity volume.

4. Maximum weight of the CCV contents, including IFW waste, secondary containers, and internal structures (e.g., CCV bottom support plate, SIA, etc.) and dunnage or shoring shall not exceed 3,500 pounds (1,587 kg).

1.2.2.3 TRISO Compacts configured with the GEO basket assembly subject to the following requirements and restrictions:

Type and Form of TRISO Compacts:

1. TRISO compacts shall be solid right circular cylinders

2. TRISO compacts shall be unirradiated.

NAC International 1.2-11

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Maximum Quantity of TRISO Compacts per Package:

1. Maximum total weight 581 pounds (263 kg).

2. Maximum enrichment 20% U-235.

3. Total mean uranium loading 68 kgU

4. Maximum mean matrix density 1.8 g/cc.

Loading Restrictions:

1. TRISO compacts shall be shipped in the GEO basket assembly.

2. TRISO compacts shall not protrude above the top end of the GEO basket fuel tubes.

3. TRISO compact shall be shipped dry (i.e., no free liquids).

1.2.3 Special Requirements for Plutonium Plutonium contents in quantities greater than 0.74 TBq (20 Ci) must be in solid form.

1.2.4 Operational Features The packaging has no special or complex operational features. Chapter 7 describes the operational steps, including use of the packagings operational features.

NAC International 1.2-12

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Table 1.2 TRU Waste FGE Limits FGE Criticality Configuration Description Weight % FGE Limit Machine Special Minimum g 239Pu Config. ID Compacted(2) Reflector(3) 240 Pu Credit (g 235U)(1)

FGE-1 1 340 (528)

FGE-2a 1 5g 350 (544)

FGE-2b 1 15 g 375 (583)

FGE-2c 1 25 g 395 (614)

FGE-3 >1 121 (188)

FGE-5 1 250 (388)

Notes:

(1)

FGE equivalents determined as described in Section 6.3.4. FGE conversion based on a ratio of subcritical mass limits in ANSI/ANS-8.1 [1-8], Section 5.2 of 0.7 kg (1.5 lb) for 235U and 0.45 kg (1.0 lb) for 239Pu. (See Table 7-1).

(2)

For uncompacted or manually compacted TRU waste, materials with hydrogen density up to that of water (0.1117 g/cm3) are unlimited, but materials with hydrogen density greater than water are limited to the hydrogen density of polyethylene (0.1336 g/cm3) and may not exceed 15% of the total contents by volume. For machine compacted contents, hydrogenous materials in the contents are limited to the hydrogen density of polyethylene (0.1336 g/cm3) in an unlimited quantity.

(3)

Special reflector materials are defined as beryllium, beryllium oxide, carbon (graphite), heavy water, magnesium oxide, and depleted uranium. The weight% of the special reflector materials is calculated as the mass of all special reflector materials present divided by the total mass of all waste material contents inside the secondary container. For FGE-3, these materials are unlimited.

Table 1.2 IFW Waste FEM Limits LEU Waste Criticality Configuration Description Weight % Enrichment Limit, Uranium Mass Limit, (1)

Config. ID Special Reflector(2) (wt% 235U) lbs. (kg)

FEM-1 1 0.90 wt% 2500 (1134)

Notes:

(1)

IFW contents must be non-machine compacted . Materials with hydrogen density up to that of water (0.1117 g/cm3) are unlimited, but materials with hydrogen density greater than water are limited to the hydrogen density of polyethylene (0.1336 g/cm3) and may not exceed 15% of the total contents by volume.

(2)

Special reflector materials are defined as beryllium, beryllium oxide, carbon (graphite), heavy water, magnesium oxide, and depleted uranium. The weight% of the special reflector materials is calculated as the mass of all special reflector materials present divided by the total mass of all waste material contents inside the secondary container.

NAC International 1.2-13

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Table 1.2-3 TRU Waste and IFW Activity Limits for Key Isotopes Activity Limits(1) for Package Configurations Isotope (Ci)

Bare(2) 1-inch SIA(3) 21/4-inch SIA(4)

Co-60 8.197E-02 1.632E-01 4.284E-01 Cs-137 2.527E+02 1.299E+03 9.245E+03 Ba-137m 3.846E-01 1.018E+00 3.995E+00 Cf-252 1.217E-02 1.289E-02 1.469E-02 Cm-244 3.819E+02 4.074E+02 4.654E+02 Notes:

(1)

Maximum activity limits are provided for entire content in a package. The corresponding maximum resultant dose rates from these isotopes at the listed activity limits are shown for the bare case (i.e., package without an SIA) in Table 5.1-2. Compliance with external dose rate limits shall be demonstrated with the isotope inventory of the individual package contents using the dose rate per curie values listed in Tables 7.5-1 and 7.5-2, as outlined in Attachment 7.5.1.

(2)

Package configuration without an SIA inside the CCV cavity.

(3)

Package configured with the 1-inch SIA inside the CCV cavity.

(4)

Package configured with the 21/4-inch SIA inside the CCV cavity.

NAC International 1.2-14

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Figure 1.2 CCV Packaging Components NAC International 1.2-15

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Figure 1.2-2 Packaging Containment System NAC International 1.2-16

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Figure 1.2-3 GEO Basket Assembly NAC International 1.2-17

This page intentionally left blank.

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR November 2021 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 0 1.3 Appendix 1.3.1 References

[1.1] Regulatory Guide 7.11, Fracture Toughness Criteria of Base Material for Ferritic Steel Shipping Packaging Containment Vessels with a Maximum Wall Thickness of 4 Inches (0.1 m), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, June 1991.

[1.2] ANSI N14.5-2014, American National Standard for Radioactive Materials - Leakage Tests on Packages for Shipment, American National Standards Institute, Inc., June 19, 2014.

[1.3] Regulatory Guide 7.6, Design Criteria for the Structural Analysis of Shipping Cask Containment Vessels, Revision 1, March 1978.

[1.4] Fischer, L. E., and Lai, W., Fabrication Criteria for Shipping Containers, NUREG/CR-3854, UCRL-53544, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, March 1985.

[1.5] American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section III, Division 1, Subsection NB, Class 1 Components, 2010 Edition with 2011 Addenda.

[1.6] American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section III, Division 1, Subsection NF, Supports, 2010 Edition with 2011 Addenda.

[1.7] NUREG/CR-5502, Engineering Drawings for 10 CFR Part 71 Package Approvals, U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission, May 1998.

[1.8] ANSI/ANS-8.1-2014, Nuclear Criticality Safety In Operations With Fissionable Materials Outside Reactors.

NAC International 1.3-1

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A 1.3.2 Glossary of Terms and Acronyms ALARA As Low As Reasonably Achievable ANSI American National Standards Institute ASME American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials B&PVC Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code CCV Cask Containment Vessel CSI Criticality Safety Index FEM Fissile Equivalent Mass (of 235U)

FGE Fissile Gram Equivalent (of 239Pu)

HAC Hypothetical Accident Conditions ICV Inner Containment Vessel ILS Impact Limiter System LEU Low-Enriched Uranium MNOP Maximum Normal Operating Pressure NCT Normal Conditions of Transport OP Outer Packaging Package The packaging with its radioactive contents (payload), as presented for transportation (10 CFR 71.4). Within this report, the package is denoted as the OPTIMUS-L package.

Packaging The assembly of components necessary to ensure compliance with packaging requirements (10 CFR 71.4). Within this report, the Packaging is denoted as the OPTIMUS-L packaging, or simply as the packaging.

Payload Radioactive contents and dunnage RAM Radioactive Material SAR Safety Analysis Report (this document)

SIA Shield Insert Assembly TRISO TRI-structural ISOtropic (fuel particle)

TRU Transuranic Waste NAC International 1.3-2

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A 1.3.4 Packaging General Arrangement Drawings The following drawings show the general arrangement and design features of the OPTIMUS-L packaging in accordance with NUREG/CR-5502 [1.7]. The drawings refer to material specifications, welding requirements, inspection and test requirements, and dimensions as necessary to support the safety analyses.

Drawing No. Title Rev.

• 70000.14-L502 Packaging Assembly - OPTIMUS-L 0NP 70000.14-L510 CCV Assembly - OPTIMUS 0NP 70000.14-L511 CCV Body Weldment - OPTIMUS 0NP 70000.14-L512 CCV Lid - OPTIMUS 0NP 70000.14-L513 Port Cover - OPTIMUS 0NP 70000.14-L514 CCV Bottom Support Plate - OPTIMUS-L 0NP 70000.14-L540 Outer Packaging Assembly - OPTIMUS-L 0NP 70000.14-L541 Outer Packaging Base - OPTIMUS-L 0NP 70000.14-L542 Outer Packaging Lid - OPTIMUS-L 0NP 70000.14-L550 1-Inch Shield Insert Assembly (SIA) - OPTIMUS 0NP 70000.14-L551 21/4-Inch Shield Insert Assembly (SIA) - OPTIMUS 0NP 70000.14-L552 3 3/4-Inch Shield Insert Assembly (SIA) - OPTIMUS 1NP 70000.14-L553 21/4-Inch SIA Annular Spacer Plate - OPTIMUS-L 0NP 70000.14-L560 GEO Basket Assembly, OPTIMUS-L 0NP 70000.14-L561 GEO Basket Weldment, OPTIMUS-L 0NP

• Proprietary drawings replaced by nonproprietary versions.

NAC International 1.3-3

This page intentionally left blank.

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 R-253259 REV CHANGE 0NP INITIAL ISSUE - DCR A F F E E PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED D D C C B B ITEM QTY NAME MATERIAL SPEC DRAWING No. DESCRIPTION DRAWING TYPE LICENSE NEXT ASSEMBLY SEE NOTE 1 NAC UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED INTERNATIONAL ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN INCHES.

DIMENSIONING AND TOLERANCING SHALL BE PER ASME GROUP NAME DATE Y14.5M-94.

Digitally signed by Thomas ALL THREAD DEPTH CALLOUTS ARE TO BE CONSIDERED PREPARER Thomas Hadaway Hadaway AS A MINIMUM DEPTH OF PERFECT THREADS.

CCV ASSEMBLY Date: 2022.07.13 13:43:11 -04'00' MACHINED SURFACES TO BE 125 OR BETTER CHECKER Kevin Klein Digitally signed by Kevin Klein Date: 2022.07.14 07:45:55 -04'00' A PROJECT Steven Sisley Digitally signed by Steven Sisley OPTIMUS A MANAGER Date: 2022.07.15 07:43:55 -04'00'

1. MAY BE 70000.14-L501 OR 70000.14-L502.

ENGINEERING Kevin Klein Digitally signed by Kevin Klein Date: 2022.07.14 07:46:19 -04'00' Digitally signed by Heath M. Baldner LICENSING Heath M. Baldner Reason: PROJECT DRAWING REV 70000.14 L510 for W. Fowler Date: 2022.07.15 11:20:47 -04'00' 0NP NOTES: Digitally signed by David M.

QUALITY David M. Jensen Jensen Date: 2022.07.21 15:51:36 -04'00' SCALE N. T. S. WEIGHT: N/A SH 1 OF 1 6/17/2022 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 R-253261 REV CHANGE 0NP INITIAL ISSUE - DCR A F F E E PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED D D C C B B ITEM QTY NAME MATERIAL SPEC DRAWING No. DESCRIPTION DRAWING TYPE LICENSE NEXT ASSEMBLY 70000.14-L510 NAC UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED INTERNATIONAL ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN INCHES.

DIMENSIONING AND TOLERANCING SHALL BE PER ASME GROUP NAME DATE Y14.5M-94.

Digitally signed by Thomas ALL THREAD DEPTH CALLOUTS ARE TO BE CONSIDERED PREPARER Thomas Hadaway Hadaway AS A MINIMUM DEPTH OF PERFECT THREADS.

CCV BODY WELDMENT Date: 2022.07.13 13:28:51 -04'00' MACHINED SURFACES TO BE 125 OR BETTER CHECKER Kevin Klein Digitally signed by Kevin Klein Date: 2022.07.14 08:06:26 -04'00' A PROJECT Steven Sisley Digitally signed by Steven Sisley Date: 2022.07.15 07:41:32 -04'00' OPTIMUS A MANAGER ENGINEERING Kevin Klein Digitally signed by Kevin Klein Date: 2022.07.14 08:06:52 -04'00' Digitally signed by Heath M. Baldner LICENSING Heath M. Baldner Reason: PROJECT DRAWING REV 70000.14 L511 for W. Fowler Date: 2022.07.15 11:23:01 -04'00' 0NP NOTES: Digitally signed by David M.

QUALITY David M. Jensen Jensen Date: 2022.07.21 15:45:53 -04'00' SCALE N. T. S. WEIGHT: N/A SH 1 OF 1 6/17/2022 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 R-253263 REV CHANGE 0NP INITIAL ISSUE - DCR A F F E E PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED D D C C B B ITEM QTY NAME MATERIAL SPEC DRAWING No. DESCRIPTION DRAWING TYPE LICENSE NEXT ASSEMBLY 70000.14-L510 NAC UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED INTERNATIONAL ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN INCHES.

DIMENSIONING AND TOLERANCING SHALL BE PER ASME GROUP NAME DATE Y14.5M-94. Digitally signed by Thomas ALL THREAD DEPTH CALLOUTS ARE TO BE CONSIDERED PREPARER Thomas Hadaway Hadaway AS A MINIMUM DEPTH OF PERFECT THREADS.

CCV LID Date: 2022.07.13 13:24:22 -04'00' MACHINED SURFACES TO BE 125 OR BETTER CHECKER Kevin Klein Digitally signed by Kevin Klein Date: 2022.07.14 08:13:30 -04'00' A PROJECT Steven Sisley Digitally signed by Steven Sisley OPTIMUS A MANAGER Date: 2022.07.15 07:39:58 -04'00' ENGINEERING Kevin Klein Digitally signed by Kevin Klein Date: 2022.07.14 08:13:56 -04'00' Digitally signed by Heath M. Baldner LICENSING Heath M. Baldner Reason: PROJECT DRAWING REV 70000.14 L512 for W. Fowler Date: 2022.07.15 11:01:03 -04'00' 0NP NOTES: Digitally signed by David M.

QUALITY David M. Jensen Jensen Date: 2022.07.21 16:00:42 -04'00' SCALE N. T. S. WEIGHT: N/A SH 1 OF 1 6/17/2022 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 R-253265 REV CHANGE 0NP INITIAL ISSUE - DCR A F F E E PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED D D C C B B ITEM QTY NAME MATERIAL SPEC DRAWING No. DESCRIPTION DRAWING TYPE LICENSE NEXT ASSEMBLY 70000.14-L510 NAC UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED INTERNATIONAL ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN INCHES.

DIMENSIONING AND TOLERANCING SHALL BE PER ASME GROUP NAME DATE Y14.5M-94.

Digitally signed by Thomas ALL THREAD DEPTH CALLOUTS ARE TO BE CONSIDERED PREPARER Thomas Hadaway Hadaway AS A MINIMUM DEPTH OF PERFECT THREADS.

PORT COVER Date: 2022.07.13 13:18:01 -04'00' MACHINED SURFACES TO BE 125 OR BETTER CHECKER Kevin Klein Digitally signed by Kevin Klein Date: 2022.07.14 08:17:26 -04'00' A PROJECT Steven Sisley Digitally signed by Steven Sisley OPTIMUS A MANAGER Date: 2022.07.15 07:38:17 -04'00' ENGINEERING Kevin Klein Digitally signed by Kevin Klein Date: 2022.07.14 08:17:48 -04'00' Digitally signed by Heath M. Baldner LICENSING Heath M. Baldner Reason: PROJECT DRAWING REV 70000.14 L513 for W. Fowler Date: 2022.07.15 11:06:29 -04'00' 0NP NOTES: Digitally signed by David M.

QUALITY David M. Jensen Jensen Date: 2022.07.21 15:55:24 -04'00' SCALE N. T. S. WEIGHT: N/A SH 1 OF 1 6/17/2022 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 R-253275 REV CHANGE 0NP INITIAL ISSUE - DCR A F F E E PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED D D C C B B ITEM QTY NAME MATERIAL SPEC DRAWING No. DESCRIPTION DRAWING TYPE LICENSE NEXT ASSEMBLY SEE NOTE 1 NAC UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED INTERNATIONAL ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN INCHES.

DIMENSIONING AND TOLERANCING SHALL BE PER ASME GROUP NAME DATE Y14.5M-94.

1-INCH SHIELD INSERT Digitally signed by Thomas ALL THREAD DEPTH CALLOUTS ARE TO BE CONSIDERED PREPARER Thomas Hadaway Hadaway AS A MINIMUM DEPTH OF PERFECT THREADS. Date: 2022.07.13 08:34:22 -04'00' MACHINED SURFACES TO BE 125 OR BETTER Kevin Klein ASSEMBLY (SIA)

Digitally signed by Kevin Klein CHECKER Date: 2022.07.14 09:36:24 -04'00' A A OPTIMUS PROJECT Digitally signed by Steven Sisley MANAGER Steven Sisley Date: 2022.07.15 07:31:19 -04'00'

1. MAY BE 70000.14-L501 OR 70000.14-L502. ENGINEERING Kevin Klein Digitally signed by Kevin Klein Date: 2022.07.14 09:37:09 -04'00' Digitally signed by Heath M. Baldner LICENSING Heath M. Baldner Reason: PROJECT DRAWING REV 70000.14 L550 for W. Fowler Date: 2022.07.15 10:42:21 -04'00' 0NP NOTES: Digitally signed by David M.

QUALITY David M. Jensen Jensen Date: 2022.07.22 07:38:04 -04'00' SCALE N. T. S. WEIGHT: N/A SH 1 OF 1 6/17/2022 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 R-253277 REV CHANGE 0NP INITIAL ISSUE - DCR A F F E E PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED D D C C B B ITEM QTY NAME MATERIAL SPEC DRAWING No. DESCRIPTION DRAWING TYPE LICENSE NEXT ASSEMBLY SEE NOTE 1 NAC UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED INTERNATIONAL ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN INCHES.

DIMENSIONING AND TOLERANCING SHALL BE PER ASME GROUP NAME DATE Y14.5M-94.

21/4-INCH SHIELD INSERT Digitally signed by Thomas ALL THREAD DEPTH CALLOUTS ARE TO BE CONSIDERED PREPARER Thomas Hadaway Hadaway AS A MINIMUM DEPTH OF PERFECT THREADS. Date: 2022.07.13 11:10:03 -04'00' MACHINED SURFACES TO BE 125 OR BETTER Kevin Klein ASSEMBLY (SIA)

Digitally signed by Kevin Klein CHECKER Date: 2022.07.14 09:40:23 -04'00' A A OPTIMUS PROJECT MANAGER Steven Sisley Digitally signed by Steven Sisley Date: 2022.07.15 07:29:51 -04'00'

1. MAY BE 70000.14-L501 OR 70000.14-L502. ENGINEERING Kevin Klein Digitally signed by Kevin Klein Date: 2022.07.14 09:40:43 -04'00' Digitally signed by Heath M. Baldner LICENSING Heath M. Baldner Reason: PROJECT DRAWING REV 70000.14 L551 for W. Fowler Date: 2022.07.15 09:47:47 -04'00' 0NP NOTES: Digitally signed by David M.

QUALITY David M. Jensen Jensen Date: 2022.07.22 07:30:52 -04'00' SCALE N. T. S. WEIGHT: N/A SH 1 OF 1 6/17/2022 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

0NP INITIAL ISSUE - DCR A 1NP INC DCR 0NPA DRAWING TYPE NEXT ASSEMBLY ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN INCHES.

DIMENSIONING AND TOLERANCING SHALL BE PER ASME GROUP NAME DATE Y14.5M-94.

3 -INCH SHIELD INSERT ALL THREAD DEPTH CALLOUTS ARE TO BE CONSIDERED AS A MINIMUM DEPTH OF PERFECT THREADS.

MACHINED SURFACES TO BE OR BETTER ASSEMBLY (SIA)

OPTIMUS 1NP N. T. S. N/A 1 1 10/26/2022

  9 cdSeffVg 012 8 345671

[\]^_]ÿ[]a^ba EFGHIGÿEGKHLKÿMNIOÿPQRÿSTSSÿQQUPVÿWXYZ

µi¶ *i*¸*k¹ÿ*>>>>1/41/2ÿ3/4ÿ¿ÿk

 

 

§¨©§¨<<¬¨ÿ°+/-©¨²¬©°

¨<<²©³<<'

 

 

 

-%1& /%1 65&1 &5%10-5, .!13 l05g-67ÿ6¥ l1.30-!%-#6

ÿ Iqrstus KLM

ÿ CDDDDEFGHIJJF vKwxyKLwvzKL{

234566ÿ89:5;<=65ÿ69>95?

ÿÿÿÿ

ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ    

ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ !01!5010

ÿÿÿÿÿÿ ÂÃÅÇÿÉÿÿÑÿÑÑÑÿxØÿÚÂ NÿPQRÿSÿTUVWÿXTY



ÿÿÿÿÿ@ÿAÿBÿÿÿ 3413"10 ÜÿÜâÿÿçéÿçççÿíÿin YUUZ[Y\ÿX]YV^\ÿ][Y_^ 

!0#$13%

&565710

'()*(+*()

óÿ÷øúÿûüýóÿÿ0ÿ1ÿ2344ÿ5678 `]_TaZXS[

"#$%&ÿ($)*+#,

ÜÿÜâÿÿçéÿçççÿíÿin

¢£

,-316.-67 9 ÿ ÿÿÿÿÿ !

!0#$13%

ÿ

mmmmn8 l05g-67 o 012 p

/05,-%1 .35,1 ÿÿ g1-74%hÿijk .4ÿ cÿÿÿÿÿÿ#fÿÿcÿ cl}~?}~l~~

  9 8

-./01ÿ345645ÿ789:ÿ;<=ÿ>?>>ÿ?@A<>ÿB-CD

0NP INITIAL ISSUE - DCR A DRAWING TYPE NEXT ASSEMBLY ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN INCHES.

DIMENSIONING AND TOLERANCING SHALL BE PER ASME GROUP NAME DATE Y14.5M-94.

ALL THREAD DEPTH CALLOUTS ARE TO BE CONSIDERED AS A MINIMUM DEPTH OF PERFECT THREADS.

MACHINED SURFACES TO BE OR BETTER GEO BASKET WELDMENT, OPTIMUS-L 0NP N. T. S. N/A 1 1 9/20/2022

This page intentionally left blank.

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR November 2021 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 0 Chapter 2 Structural Evaluation Table of Contents 2 STRUCTURAL EVALUATION ................................................................................... 2-1 2.1 Description of Structural Design ................................................................................. 2.1-1 2.1.1 Discussion .................................................................................................. 2.1-1 2.1.2 Design Criteria ........................................................................................... 2.1-2 2.1.3 Weights and Centers of Gravity............................................................... 2.1-11 2.1.4 Identification of Codes and Standards for Packaging .............................. 2.1-11 2.2 Materials ...................................................................................................................... 2.2-1 2.2.1 Material Properties and Specifications ...................................................... 2.2-1 2.2.2 Chemical, Galvanic or Other Reactions..................................................... 2.2-2 2.2.3 Effects of Radiation on Materials .............................................................. 2.2-4 2.3 Fabrication and Examination ....................................................................................... 2.3-1 2.3.1 Fabrication ................................................................................................. 2.3-1 2.3.2 Examination ............................................................................................... 2.3-3 2.4 General Requirements for All Packages ...................................................................... 2.4-1 2.4.1 Minimum Package Size ............................................................................. 2.4-1 2.4.2 Tamper-Indicating Feature......................................................................... 2.4-1 2.4.3 Positive Closure ......................................................................................... 2.4-1 2.5 Lifting and Tie-Down Standards for All Packages ...................................................... 2.5-1 2.5.1 Lifting Devices........................................................................................... 2.5-1 2.5.2 Tie-Down Devices ..................................................................................... 2.5-5 2.6 Normal Conditions of Transport .................................................................................. 2.6-1 2.6.1 Heat ............................................................................................................ 2.6-1 2.6.2 Cold ............................................................................................................ 2.6-8 2.6.3 Reduced External Pressure ........................................................................ 2.6-8 2.6.4 Increased External Pressure ..................................................................... 2.6-12 2.6.5 Vibration .................................................................................................. 2.6-12 2.6.6 Water Spray ............................................................................................. 2.6-12 2.6.7 Free Drop ................................................................................................. 2.6-13 2.6.8 Corner Drop ............................................................................................. 2.6-37 2.6.9 Compression ............................................................................................ 2.6-37 2.6.10 Penetration ............................................................................................... 2.6-37 2.7 Hypothetical Accident Conditions ............................................................................... 2.7-1 2.7.1 Free Drop ................................................................................................... 2.7-1 2.7.2 Crush ........................................................................................................ 2.7-37 2.7.3 Puncture ................................................................................................... 2.7-37 2.7.4 Thermal .................................................................................................... 2.7-44 2.7.5 Immersion - Fissile Material ................................................................... 2.7-47 NAC International 2-i

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A 2.7.6 Immersion - All Packages ....................................................................... 2.7-47 2.7.7 Deep-Water Immersion Test (for Type B Packages Containing more than 105 A2) .............................................................................................. 2.7-47 2.7.8 Summary of Damage ............................................................................... 2.7-51 2.8 Accident Conditions for Air Transport of Plutonium .................................................. 2.8-1 2.9 Accident Conditions for Fissile Material Packages for Air Transport ........................ 2.9-1 2.10 Special Form .............................................................................................................. 2.10-1 2.11 Fuel Rods ................................................................................................................... 2.11-1 2.12 Appendices................................................................................................................. 2.12-1 2.12.1 References ................................................................................................ 2.12-1 2.12.2 Computer Code Descriptions ................................................................... 2.12-3 2.12.3 ..................................... 2.12-4 2.12.4 Development of Equivalent Static Loads ................................................ 2.12-6 2.12.5 Structural Evaluation of GEO Basket Assembly for TRISO Compact Contents .................................................................................. 2.12-11 NAC International 2-ii

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR November 2021 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 0 List of Figures Figure 2.1 CCV Stress Evaluation Locations.................................................................. 2.1-19 Figure 2.1 Package Mass Properties Schematic .............................................................. 2.1-20 Figure 2.2 Foam Upper and Lower-Bound Dynamic Stress-Strain Curves........... 2.2-11 Figure 2.2 Foam Upper and Lower-Bound Dynamic Stress-Strain Curves......... 2.2-11 Figure 2.5 Lifting Attachment Loading Diagram ........................................................... 2.5-12 Figure 2.5 Package Tiedown Configuration ................................................................... 2.5-13 Figure 2.5 Tiedown Arm Loading Diagram.................................................................... 2.5-14 Figure 2.6 1/2-Symmetry CCV FEA Stress Analysis Model.............................................. 2.6-6 Figure 2.6 Bounding NCT Heat Temperature Distribution .............................................. 2.6-7 Figure 2.6 NCT 4-Foot (1.2 m) Free Drop Impact Orientations ..................................... 2.6-28 Figure 2.6 Drop Analysis 1/2-Symmetry Model - Isometric View .................................. 2.6-29 Figure 2.6 Cold/Hard NCT Bottom End Drop (Case NBE1) Impact Limiter Deformation .............................................................................................. 2.6-30 Figure 2.6 Cold/Hard NCT Bottom End Drop (Case NBE1) Rigid-Body Acceleration Time-History ....................................................................... 2.6-30 Figure 2.6 Cold/Hard NCT Top End Drop (Case NTE1) Impact Limiter Deformation .............................................................................................. 2.6-31 Figure 2.6 Cold/Hard NCT Top End Drop (Case NTE1) Rigid-Body Acceleration Time-History ............................................................................................. 2.6-31 Figure 2.6 Cold/Hard NCT Bottom Corner Drop (Case NBC1) Impact Limiter Deformation .............................................................................................. 2.6-32 Figure 2.6 Cold/Hard NCT Bottom Corner Drop (Case NBC1) Rigid-Body Acceleration Time-History ....................................................................... 2.6-32 Figure 2.6 Cold/Hard NCT Top Corner Drop (Case NTC1) Impact Limiter Deformation .............................................................................................. 2.6-33 Figure 2.6 Cold/Hard NCT Top Corner Drop (Case NTC1) Rigid-Body Acceleration Time-History ....................................................................... 2.6-33 Figure 2.6 Cold/Hard NCT Side Drop (Case NS1) Impact Limiter Deformation ........ 2.6-34 Figure 2.6 Cold/Hard NCT Side Drop (Case NS1) Rigid-Body Acceleration Time-History ............................................................................................. 2.6-34 Figure 2.6 Cold/Hard NCT Side Drop (Case NS1) OP Bolt Average Tensile Stress Time-History .................................................................................. 2.6-35 Figure 2.6 SIA 1/8-Symmetry Finite Element Models ................................................. 2.6-36 Figure 2.7 HAC Free Drop Impact Orientations ............................................................... 2.7-5 Figure 2.7 HAC Hot/Soft Bottom End Drop (Case HBE2) OP Deformation................. 2.7-12 Figure 2.7 HAC Hot/Soft Top End Drop (Case HTE2) OP Deformation ...................... 2.7-13 Figure 2.7 HAC Cold/Hard Bottom End Drop (Case HBE1) Rigid-Body Acceleration Time-History ....................................................................... 2.7-14 Figure 2.7 HAC Cold/Hard Top End Drop (Case HTE1) Rigid-Body Acceleration Time-History ....................................................................... 2.7-14 Figure 2.7 HAC Cold/Hard Top End Drop (Case HTE1) OP Bolt Average Tensile Stress Time-History ..................................................................... 2.7-15 Figure 2.7 Hot/Soft HAC Side Drop (Case HS2) OP Deformation ................................ 2.7-20 NAC International 2-iii

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Figure 2.7 Cold/Hard HAC Side Drop (Case HS1) Rigid-Body Acceleration Time-History ............................................................................................. 2.7-20 Figure 2.7 Cold/Hard HAC Side Drop (Case HS1) OP Bolt Average Tensile Stress Time-History .................................................................................. 2.7-21 Figure 2.7 Hot/Soft HAC Bottom Corner Drop (Case HBC2) OP Deformation .......... 2.7-26 Figure 2.7 Hot/ Soft HAC Top Corner Drop (Case HTC2) OP Deformation .............. 2.7-27 Figure 2.7 Cold/Hard HAC Bottom Corner Drop (Case HBC1) Rigid-Body Acceleration Time-History ....................................................................... 2.7-28 Figure 2.7 Cold/Hard HAC Top Corner Drop (Case HTC1) Rigid-Body Acceleration Time-History ....................................................................... 2.7-28 Figure 2.7 Cold/Hard HAC Top Corner Drop (Case HTC1) OP Bolt Average Tensile Stress Time-History ..................................................................... 2.7-29 Figure 2.7 Cold/Hard HAC 10 Bottom Oblique Drop (Case HBO1) OP Deformations............................................................................................. 2.7-33 Figure 2.7 Cold/Hard HAC 10 Top End Oblique Drop (Case HTO1) OP Deformation .............................................................................................. 2.7-33 Figure 2.7 Cold/Hard HAC 10 Bottom End Oblique Drop (Case HBO1) Rigid-Body Acceleration Time-History.............................................................. 2.7-34 Figure 2.7 Cold/Hard HAC 10 Top End Oblique Drop (Case HTO1) Rigid-Body Acceleration Time-History.............................................................. 2.7-34 Figure 2.7 HAC Puncture Drop Orientations ................................................................ 2.7-40 Figure 2.7 Cumulative OP Deformation - Hot/Soft HAC Top Center Puncture (Case PTE1) .............................................................................................. 2.7-41 Figure 2.7 Cumulative OP Deformation - Hot/Soft HAC Top Off-Center Puncture (Case PTE2) ............................................................................... 2.7-42 Figure 2.7 Cumulative OP Deformation - Hot/Soft HAC Side Puncture (Case PS1) ........................................................................................................... 2.7-43 Figure 2.12 Benchmark Comparison of HAC Side Drop Analysis and Test Results ....................................................................................................... 2.12-6 Figure 2.12 DLF Curve for Half-Sine Pulse ................................................................. 2.12-10 Figure 2.12 CCV Shell Bottom End 1/2-Symmetry Finite Element Model ................... 2.12-10 Figure 2.12.5 GEO Basket Finite Element Model, 0° Orientation ............................... 2.12-30 Figure 2.12.5 GEO Basket Finite Element Model, 30° Orientation ............................. 2.12-31 Figure 2.12.5 Plate Section Locations for Stress Evaluations, 0° GEO Model ............ 2.12-32 Figure 2.12.5 Weld Section Locations for Stress Evaluations, 0° GEO Model............ 2.12-33 Figure 2.12.5 Plate Section Locations for Stress Evaluations, 30° GEO Model .......... 2.12-34 Figure 2.12.5 Weld Section Locations for Stress Evaluations, 30° GEO Model.......... 2.12-35 Figure 2.12.5 GEO Basket Fule Tube Finite Element Models ..................................... 2.12-36 Figure 2.12.5 SDOF Transient Analysis Model Schematic .......................................... 2.12-49 Figure 2.12.5 GEO Basket Details for Modal Analasys Model .................................... 2.12-50 Figure 2.12.5 CCV and GEO Basket Model for Modal Analysis ............................... 2.12-51 NAC International 2-iv

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR November 2021 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 0 List of Tables Table 2.1 Load Combinations for Normal Conditions of Transport ............................... 2.1-13 Table 2.1 Load Combinations for Hypothetical Accident Conditions ............................ 2.1-14 Table 2.1 Containment System Allowable Stress Design Criteria.................................. 2.1-15 Table 2.1 Non-Containment Component Allowable Stress Design Criteria .................. 2.1-16 Table 2.1 CCV Shell Buckling Geometric Parameters ................................................... 2.1-17 Table 2.1 CCV Shell Buckling Reduction Factors and Theoretical Buckling Stresses ...................................................................................................... 2.1-17 Table 2.1 CCV Shell Allowable Buckling Stresses ........................................................ 2.1-18 Table 2.1 Package Weight and Center of Gravity Summary .......................................... 2.1-18 Table 2.2 Packaging Structural Material Specifications ................................................... 2.2-6 Table 2.2 Mechanical Properties of SA-182, Type F304/F316 Stainless Steel (t > 5 in.) ..................................................................................................... 2.2-7 Table 2.2 Mechanical Properties of A240/SA-240 or A479/SA-479, Type 304/316 Stainless Steel ............................................................................... 2.2-7 Table 2.2 Mechanical Properties of SA-320, Grade L43 Alloy Steel Bolts (t 4 in.) ..................................................................................................... 2.2-8 Table 2.2 Mechanical Properties of SA-193, Grade B8, Class 1 Stainless Steel Bolts ............................................................................................................ 2.2-8 Table 2.2 Mechanical Properties of A36/SA-36 Carbon Steel ......................................... 2.2-9 Table 2.2 Mechanical Properties of A240/SA-240 or A479/SA-479, Type XM-19 Stainless Steel ............................................................................................. 2.2-9 Table 2.2 Mechanical Properties of A574/SA-574 Alloy Steel Socket-Head Cap Screws ....................................................................................................... 2.2-10 Table 2.2 9 - Mechanical Properties of A516, Grade 70 Carbon Steel ................................ 2.2-10 Table 2.5 Lifting Attachment Stress Summary ............................................................... 2.5-11 Table 2.5 Tiedown Attachment Stress Summary ............................................................ 2.5-11 Table 2.6 Reduced External Pressure Stress Summary................................................... 2.6-11 Table 2.6 Summary of NCT Free Drop Cases Evaluated ............................................... 2.6-24 Table 2.6 NCT Free Drop Impact Analysis Results........................................................ 2.6-24 Table 2.6 NCT End Drop Stress Summary ..................................................................... 2.6-25 Table 2.6 NCT Side Drop Stress Summary .................................................................... 2.6-26 Table 2.6 NCT Top Corner Drop Stress Summary ......................................................... 2.6-26 Table 2.6 CCV Shell NCT Free Drop Buckling Evaluation Stress Summary ................ 2.6-27 Table 2.6 CCV Shell Buckling Evaluation Results for NCT Free Drop......................... 2.6-27 Table 2.7 Summary of HAC Free Drop Cases Evaluated ................................................. 2.7-4 Table 2.7 HAC End Drop Impact Limiter Analysis Results ........................................... 2.7-10 Table 2.7 HAC End Drop Stress Summary..................................................................... 2.7-10 Table 2.7 CCV Shell HAC End Drop Buckling Evaluation Stress Summary ................ 2.7-11 Table 2.7 CCV Shell Buckling Evaluation Results for HAC Bottom End Drop ............ 2.7-11 Table 2.7 HAC Side Drop Impact Limiter Analysis Results .......................................... 2.7-19 Table 2.7 HAC Side Drop Stress Summary .................................................................... 2.7-19 Table 2.7 HAC Corner Drop Impact Limiter Analysis Results ...................................... 2.7-25 Table 2.7 HAC Top Corner Drop Stress Summary ........................................................ 2.7-25 Table 2.7 HAC Oblique Drop Impact Limiter Analysis Results .................................. 2.7-32 Table 2.7 Summary of HAC Puncture Cases Evaluated ............................................... 2.7-40 NAC International 2-v

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Table 2.7 HAC Pressure Stress Summary..................................................................... 2.7-46 Table 2.7 Deep Water Immersion Test Stress Summary .............................................. 2.7-49 Table 2.7 CCV Shell Buckling Summary for Deep Water Immersion Test ................. 2.7-50 Table 2.12 ...... 2.12-6 Table 2.12 Summary of Free Drop DLFs and Equivalent Static Accelerations ............. 2.12-9 Table 2.12.5 GEO Basket Allowable Stress Design Criteria ........................................ 2.12-13 Table 2.12.5 Package Weight and Center of Gravity Summary for Geo Basket and TRISO Compact Contents Configuration ........................................ 2.12-13 Table 2.12.5 Mechanical Properties of SA537, Class 1 Carbon Steel .......................... 2.12-16 Table 2.12.5 Mechanical Properties of SA350, LF3 Carbon Steel ............................... 2.12-16 Table 2.12.5 GEO Basket NCT Side Drop Plate Stress Summary, Pm ......................... 2.12-27 Table 2.12.5 GEO Basket NCT Side Drop Plate Stress Summary, Pm + Pb ................. 2.12-27 Table 2.12.5 GEO Basket NCT Side Drop CJP Weld Stress Summary, Pm ................. 2.12-28 Table 2.12.5 GEO Basket NCT Side Drop CJP Weld Stress Summary, Pm + Pb ......... 2.12-28 Table 2.12.5 GEO Basket NCT Side Drop Fillet Weld Stress Summary ..................... 2.12-29 Table 2.12.5 GEO Basket Fuel Tube NCT Side Drop Radial Compressive Forces ...................................................................................................... 2.12-29 Table 2.12.5 GEO Basket HAC Side Drop Plate Stress Summary, Pm ...................... 2.12-42 Table 2.12.5 GEO Basket HAC Side Drop Plate Stress Summary, Pm + Pb ............... 2.12-42 Table 2.12.5 GEO Basket HAC Side Drop CJP Weld Stress Summary, Pm .............. 2.12-43 Table 2.12.5 GEO Basket HAC Side Drop CJP Weld Stress Summary, Pm + Pb....... 2.12-43 Table 2.12.5 GEO Basket HAC Side Drop Fillet Weld Stress Summary................... 2.12-44 Table 2.12.5 GEO Basket Fuel Tube HAC Side Drop Radial Compressive Forces ...................................................................................................... 2.12-44 Table 2.12.5 Summary of End Drup DLFs ................................................................. 2.12-48 Table 2.12.5 Summary of Side Drop DLFs ................................................................ 2.12-48 Table 2.12.5 Summary of Equivalent Static Accellerations ....................................... 2.12-49 NAC International 2-vi

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A 2 STRUCTURAL EVALUATION The structural evaluation of the OPTIMUS-L packaging demonstrates compliance with the applicable performance requirements of 10 CFR 71. Compliance with the applicable general standards of 10 CFR 71.43(a), (b), and (c) is demonstrated in Section 2.4. Compliance with the lifting and tie-down standards of 10 CFR 71.45(a) and (b) is demonstrated in Section 2.5. The structural evaluation for NCT tests (10 CFR 71.71) and HAC tests (10 CFR 71.73) presented in Sections 2.6 and 2.7, respectively, demonstrates the packaging satisfies the applicable structural design criteria, as described in Section 2.1.2. Structural evaluation demonstrating compliance with the applicable performance requirements of 10 CFR 71 for the GEO basket assembly with TRISO compact contents is contained in Section 2.12.5.

The results of the structural evaluation demonstrate that the packaging will experience no loss or dispersal of radioactive contents, no significant increase in external surface radiation levels, and no substantial reduction in the effectiveness of the packaging under NCT tests. Therefore, the packaging satisfies the requirements of 10 CFR 71.43(f) and 10 CFR 71.51(a)(1). The structural evaluation also shows the cumulative packaging damage resulting from the HAC test sequence does not result in escape of other radioactive material exceeding a total amount of A2 in one week, nor does it result in an external radiation dose rate that exceeds 10 mSv/h at 1 m from the external surface of the packaging. Thus, the packaging satisfies the requirements of 10 CFR 71.51(a)(2).

The structural evaluation of the packaging is performed by analysis using computational modeling software (CMS) and classical closed form solutions (hand calculations). The analytic techniques used for the structural evaluation comply with guidance provided in Regulatory Guide 7.9 [2.3], as supplemented by Interim Staff Guidance - 21 (ISG 21) [2.4]. The ANSYS and LS-DYNA computer programs are used for the structural evaluation of the packaging. These computer programs are well-benchmarked and widely used for structural analyses of transportation packages for radioactive materials. Descriptions of these computer programs, including discussion of validation of the computer codes, are provided in Section 2.12.2. The computer models used for the structural evaluation are identified and described in the following sections.

NAC International 2-1

This page intentionally left blank.

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR November 2021 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 0 a rigid-body for the NCT free drop analysis. The nonlinear contact between the various components of the packaging are modeled using the surface-to-surface contact type.

The foam cores of the OP base and lid are modeled using the LS-DYNA crushable foam material model. The dynamic compressive stress-strain properties used for the 5 pcf and 24 pcf foam cores are based on the upper-bound curves shown in Figure 2.2-1 and Figure 2.2-2, respectively.

The tensile cut-off value for the foam materials (i.e., the limit on tensile stress) is conservatively set to 0 psi.

The piecewise-linear plasticity material model, which allows for the input of the stress-strain and define failure based on the plastic strain, is used for the steel components of the OP assembly.

The true stress-true strain data used for stainless steel are developed in accordance with Section VIII, Division 2, Annex 3.D of the ASME Code [2.22] conservatively using the material properties from Section 2.2.1.1. The OP bolts are modeled using linear elastic material properties. All steel properties are based on an upper-bound temperature of 300F (149C).

Symmetry boundary displacement constraints are applied to the model nodes located on the 1/2-symmetry plane. Each NCT free drop time-history analysis is started just before initial contact between the impact limiter outer surface and the target. An initial vertical velocity of 192.6 in/s (4.89 m/s), corresponding to a free fall velocity from a height of 4.0 feet (1.2 m), is applied to the package in all cases. In addition, a constant gravitational acceleration of 386.4 in/s2 (9.81 m/s2) is applied to the model.

For the drop loads analysis, the cold thermal condition (i.e., an ambient temperature of -40°F

(-40°C) with zero decay heat and no insolation) is the worst case since it results in the lowest package temperatures, the highest crush strength of the impact limiter foam, and the highest acceleration loads. The hot thermal condition (i.e., an ambient temperature of 100°F (38°C) with maximum decay heat and insolation), for which the package temperatures are highest and the foam crush strength is lowest, are not considered in the NCT free drop impact analysis since the accelerations will be bounded by those under cold thermal conditions and because there is no potential for the packaging to bottom out due to NCT free drop impacts. Furthermore, the shielding and criticality evaluations for NCT conservatively use package spacing based on a bounding 65% crush depth for the impact limiters based on damage resulting from the HAC free drop.

The package is evaluated for five different NCT free drop impact orientations, as shown in Figure 2.6-3. These include bottom end drop, top end drop, bottom corner drop, top corner drop, and side drop. NCT oblique drops are not evaluated since they are expected to be bounded by NAC International 2.6-15

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A the side drop acceleration loads because the OPTIMUS-L package has a very small aspect ratio (i.e., height to diameter). The NCT free drop evaluation is performed using the heaviest CCV contents, weighing 3,500-pound (1,587 kg) including the weight of the waste and the secondary container it is packaged in, internal structures (e.g., CCV bottom support plate and/or optional SIA) and dunnage or shoring, as required. A summary of the NCT free drop cases evaluated in provided in Table 2.6-2.

The maximum impact limiter deformation and peak rigid-body accelerations resulting from each NCT free drop cases evaluated are summarized in Table 2.6-3. The impact limiter deformation and rigid-body acceleration time history resulting from each of the NCT free drop orientations evaluated are shown in Figure 2.6-5 through Figure 2.6-14. The impact limiter damage resulting from the NCT free drop is minimal and will not affect the ability of the package to withstand the HAC tests required by required by 10 CFR 71.73.

Therefore, the OP closure bolt stresses resulting from the NCT free drop satisfy the applicable allowable stress design criteria.

2.6.7.2 Stress Evaluation 2.6.7.2.1 CCV The stresses in the CCV due to NCT free drop loading are determined using finite element analysis methods. Equivalent-static linear-elastic analyses are performed for those NCT bottom and top end drops, NCT side drop, and NCT top corner drop. The NCT bottom corner drop is not evaluated because it is expected to be bounded by the NCT top corner drop, which produces higher stresses in the CCV lid and closure bolts and is most critical for the CCV containment.

The equivalent static acceleration loads for each NCT free drop orientation are equal to the peak rigid body accelerations of the package multiplied by a DLF that accounts for dynamic amplification within the packaging. As discussed in Section 2.12.4, the DLF for each NCT free drop case is determined using the DLF curve for an undamped single degree of freedom system subjected to a half-sine pulse. As shown in Figure 2.12-2, the DLF is a function of the t/T ratio, where the load pulse duration (t) is taken from the rigid-body acceleration time-history curve for NAC International 2.6-16

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A 2.7 Hypothetical Accident Conditions The package meets the standards specified in 10 CFR 71.51(a)(2) when subjected to the HAC tests specified in 10 CFR 71.73. In accordance with Regulatory Guide 7.6 [2.13], design by analysis is used for the structural evaluation of the package. The structural evaluation for HAC is based on sequential application of the HAC tests specified in 10 CFR 71.73(c) to determine the cumulative effect on the package, in accordance with 10 CFR 71.73(a). As discussed in Section 2.6, no significant package damage results from the NCT tests of 10 CFR 71.71. Thus, the evaluation of the package for the HAC test sequence is performed starting with an undamaged specimen. The package is evaluated for the most unfavorable initial conditions specified in 10 CFR 71.73(b). The HAC load combinations considered in the structural evaluation are developed in accordance with Regulatory Guide 7.8 [2.5] and summarized in Section 2.1.2.1.

The results of the structural evaluation show that the package satisfies the applicable allowable stress design criteria of the ASME Code when subjected to the HAC tests of 10 CFR 71.73. A summary of the cumulative package damage resulting from the HAC tests is provided in Section 2.7.8. The predicted package damage is considered in the package thermal, containment, and shielding HAC evaluations. The containment and shielding evaluations of the package show that the cumulative package damage resulting from the HAC test sequence results in no escape of other radioactive material exceeding a total amount of A2 in one week and no external radiation dose rate exceeding 1 mrem/h (10 mSv/h) at 40 in (1 m) from the external surface of the package, in accordance with 10 CFR 71.51(a)(2).

2.7.1 Free Drop In accordance with 10 CFR 71.73(c)(1), the package is subjected to a free drop of 30 feet (9 m) onto a flat, essentially unyielding, horizontal surface, striking in a position for which maximum damage is expected. In accordance with the requirements of Regulatory Guide 7.8 [2.5], the worst-case initial conditions are considered for the HAC free drop test. These initial conditions include ambient temperatures that range from -40°F (-40°C) with zero decay heat and zero insolation (i.e., cold thermal condition) to an ambient temperature of 100°F (38°C) with maximum decay heat and maximum insolation (i.e., hot thermal condition).

NAC International 2.7-1

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR November 2021 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 0 A drop loads analysis is performed to predict the acceleration loading on the CCV and the damage to the packaging for seven (7) different HAC free drop impact orientations, including a bottom end drop, top end drop, bottom corner drop, top corner drop, horizontal side drop, 10-degree bottom end oblique drop, and 10-degree top end oblique drop. The HAC free drop conditions evaluated are summarized in Table 2.7-1 and shown in Figure 2.7-1. For each HAC free drop impact orientation considered, upper bound and lower bound analyses are performed.

The upper-bound analyses are performed using the impact limiter material upper-bound strength properties for the cold thermal condition temperature of -40°F (-40°C). This case, which is referred to as the cold/hard case, generally produces the maximum peak rigid-body package accelerations. The lower-bound analyses are performed using the impact limiter material lower-bound strength properties for the hot thermal condition ambient temperature of 100°F (38°C), maximum decay heat, and insolation. This case, which is referred to as the hot/soft case, generally produces the maximum impact limiter deformation and the lowest peak rigid body package acceleration, are evaluated to assure that the impact limiter will not bottom-out, causing large impact loads to be imparted to the package. For all HAC free drop cases evaluated, the maximum CCV content weight of 3,500 pounds (1,587 kg) is used. Although lower CCV content weights can produce higher package accelerations, the resulting drop forces (equal to the mass times the acceleration) and packaging stresses are generally lower.

The LS-DYNA explicit dynamic finite element code, which is described in Section 2.12.2.2, is used for the drop loads analysis. In addition to determining the package accelerations and damage, this analysis demonstrates the structural adequacy of the OP closure bolts for the HAC free drop tests. The maximum tensile stresses in the OP closure bolts are shown to satisfy the applicable allowable stress design criteria. Furthermore, the maximum crush depth of the OP assembly polyurethane foam due to each HAC free drop is less than the allowable crush depth.

The drop loads analysis of the package for each HAC free drop impact orientation are discussed in the following sections.

Detailed stress analyses of the CCV for HAC free drop loading are performed using linear-elastic equivalent static finite element analysis methods. The ANSYS computer program, which is described in Section 2.12.2.1, is used for this analysis. Stresses in the 1-inch and 21/4-inch SIAs are not evaluated for HAC free drop loading because they are not credited for shielding under HAC. Bounding equivalent-static acceleration design loads are applied to the finite element models for each HAC free drop orientation. The bounding equivalent-static acceleration design loads are determined by multiplying the packaging peak rigid body accelerations for each HAC free drop condition by a DLF to account for possible dynamic amplification within the packaging. A bounding DLF of 1.16 is derived in Section 2.12.4 based on the dynamic response of the CCV assembly to the various NCT and HAC free drop impact orientations.

NAC International 2.7-2

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A

[2.29] American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section III, Division 1, Subsection NG, Core Support Structures, 2010 Edition with 2011 Addenda.

[2.30] Regulatory Guide 1.61, Damping Values for Seismic Design of Nuclear Power Plants, Revision 1, March 2007.

[2.31] Thomson, W.T., Theory of Vibrations with Applications, Prentice-Hall, 2nd Edition.

NAC International 2.12-3

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A 2.12.2 Computer Code Descriptions NAC International 2.12-4

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A NAC International 2.12-5

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Figure 2.12 Benchmark Comparison of HAC Side Drop Analysis and Test Results NAC International 2.12-6

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A 2.12.4 Development of Equivalent Static Loads The stresses in the CCV due to NCT and HAC free drop loading are calculated using equivalent-static linear-elastic finite element analyses. The equivalent-static acceleration loads for each NCT and HAC free drop test are equal to the peak rigid body accelerations of the packaging multiplied by a DLF that accounts for possible dynamic amplification within the packaging. The DLF is a function of the general shape of the rigid-body acceleration time-history pulse and the ratio of the duration of the rigid body acceleration time-history to the packaging period (t/T).

NAC International 2.12-7

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Table 2.12-2 provides a summary of the DLFs and equivalent static acceleration loads for the NCT and HAC free drop orientations that are considered in the packaging stress analysis. The DLF used for each free drop case taken from Figure 2.12-2 at the corresponding t/T ratio, where the load pulse duration (t) is taken from the rigid-body acceleration time-history curve for the drop case and the corresponding highest natural period (T) is based on the lowest fundamental frequency of the CCV for the drop orientation, as discussed previously. The results show that the DLFs for the NCT and HAC free drops range between 1.11 and 1.16, depending on the t/T ratios. Therefore, for the purpose of the packaging structural analyses, a bounding DLF of 1.16 is conservatively used to calculate the equivalent static accelerations for all free drops.

NAC International 2.12-8

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Table 2.12 Summary of Free Drop DLFs and Equivalent Static Accelerations NAC International 2.12-9

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Figure 2.12 DLF Curve for Half-Sine Pulse Figure 2.12 CCV Shell Bottom End 1/2-Symmetry Finite Element Model NAC International 2.12-10

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A 2.12.5 Structural Evaluation of GEO Basket Assembly for TRISO Compact Contents NAC International 2.12-11

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A NAC International 2.12-12

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Table 2.12.5 GEO Basket Allowable Stress Design Criteria Table 2.12.5 Package Weight and Center of Gravity Summary for GEO Basket and TRISO Compact Contents Configuration NAC International 2.12-13

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A 2.12.5.2 Materials NAC International 2.12-14

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A NAC International 2.12-15

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Table 2.12.5 Mechanical Properties of SA537, Class 1 Carbon Steel Table 2.12.5 Mechanical Properties of SA350, LF3 Carbon Steel NAC International 2.12-16

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A 2.12.5.3 Fabrication and Examination 2.12.5.3.1 Fabrication NAC International 2.12-17

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A NAC International 2.12-18

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A NAC International 2.12-19

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A NAC International 2.12-20

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A NAC International 2.12-21

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A NAC International 2.12-22

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A NAC International 2.12-23

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A NAC International 2.12-24

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A NAC International 2.12-25

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A NAC International 2.12-26

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Table 2.12.5 GEO Basket NCT Side Drop Plate Stress Summary, Pm Table 2.12.5 GEO Basket NCT Side Drop Plate Stress Summary, Pm + Pb NAC International 2.12-27

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Table 2.12.5 GEO Basket NCT Side Drop CJP Weld Stress Summary, Pm Table 2.12.5 GEO Basket NCT Side Drop CJP Weld Stress Summary, Pm + Pb NAC International 2.12-28

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Table 2.12.5 GEO Basket NCT Side Drop Fillet Weld Stress Summary Table 2.12.5 GEO Basket Fuel Tube NCT Side Drop Radial Compressive Forces NAC International 2.12-29

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Figure 2.12.5 GEO Basket Finite Element Model, 0 Orientation NAC International 2.12-30

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Figure 2.12.5 GEO Basket Finite Element Model, 30 Orientation NAC International 2.12-31

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Figure 2.12.5 Plate Section Locations for Stress Evaluations, 0 GEO Model NAC International 2.12-32

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Figure 2.12.5 Weld Section Locations for Stress Evaluations, 0 GEO Model NAC International 2.12-33

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Figure 2.12.5 Plate Section Locations for Stress Evaluations, 30 GEO Model NAC International 2.12-34

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Figure 2.12.5 Weld Section Locations for Stress Evaluations, 30 GEO Model NAC International 2.12-35

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Figure 2.12.5 GEO Basket Fuel Tube Finite Element Models NAC International 2.12-36

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A NAC International 2.12-37

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A NAC International 2.12-38

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A NAC International 2.12-39

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A NAC International 2.12-40

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A NAC International 2.12-41

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Table 2.12.5 GEO Basket HAC Side Drop Plate Stress Summary, P Table 2.12.5 GEO Basket HAC Side Drop Plate Stress Summary, Pm + Pb NAC International 2.12-42

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Table 2.12.5 GEO Basket HAC Side Drop CJP Weld Stress Summary, Pm Table 2.12.5 GEO Basket HAC Side Drop CJP Weld Stress Summary, Pm + Pb NAC International 2.12-43

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Table 2.12.5 GEO Basket HAC Side Drop Fillet Weld Stress Summary Table 2.12.5 GEO Basket Fuel Tube HAC Side Drop Radial Compressive Forces NAC International 2.12-44

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A NAC International 2.12-45

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A NAC International 2.12-46

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A NAC International 2.12-47

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Table 2.12.5 Summary of End Drop DLFs Table 2.12.5 Summary of Side Drop DLFs NAC International 2.12-48

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Table 2.12.5 Summary of Equivalent Static Accelerations Figure 2.12.5 SDOF Transient Analysis Model Schematic NAC International 2.12-49

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Figure 2.12.5 GEO Basket Details for Modal Analysis Model NAC International 2.12-50

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Figure 2.12.5 CCV & GEO Basket Model for Modal Analysis NAC International 2.12-51

This page intentionally left blank.

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Chapter 3 Thermal Evaluation Table of Contents 3 THERMAL EVALUATION ........................................................................................... 3-1 3.1 Description of Thermal Design ..................................................................................... 3.1-1 3.1.1 Design Features ................................................................................................. 3.1-1 3.1.2 Contents Decay Heat ....................................................................................... 3.1-2 3.1.3 Summary Table of Temperatures...................................................................... 3.1-2 3.1.4 Summary Table of Maximum Pressures ........................................................... 3.1-4 3.2 Material Properties and Component Specifications ...................................................... 3.2-1 3.2.1 Material Properties ............................................................................................ 3.2-1 3.2.2 Component Specifications ................................................................................ 3.2-1 3.3 Thermal Evaluation Under Normal Conditions of Transport ....................................... 3.3-1 3.3.1 Heat and Cold ................................................................................................. 3.3-12 3.3.2 Maximum Normal Operating Pressure ........................................................... 3.3-12 3.4 Thermal Evaluation Under Hypothetical Accident Conditions .................................... 3.4-1 3.4.1 Initial Conditions .............................................................................................. 3.4-1 3.4.2 Fire Test Conditions.......................................................................................... 3.4-2 3.4.3 Maximum Temperatures and Pressure.............................................................. 3.4-4 3.4.4 Maximum Thermal Stresses ............................................................................. 3.4-7 3.4.5 Accident Conditions for Fissile Material Packages for Air Transport ............. 3.4-7 3.5 Appendices .................................................................................................................... 3.5-1 3.5.1 References ......................................................................................................... 3.5-1 3.5.2 Sensitivity Analyses of Modeling Parameters .................................................. 3.5-3 NAC International 3-i

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A List of Figures Figure 3.3 Package 3-D 1/2-Symmetry Thermal Models for NCT ................................... 3.3-16 Figure 3.3 Expanded View of the CCV with Contents Modeled in 110-Gallon Drum .............................................................................................................. 3.3-17 Figure 3.3 Application of Convection Boundary Conditions for NCT (and Shade)....... 3.3-18 Figure 3.3 Heat Transfer Coefficients for General Standards (shade) and NCT ............ 3.3-19 Figure 3.3 NCT Heat Temperature Contour Plot - 100W Volumetric Heat Source ...... 3.3-20 Figure 3.4 Package 3-D 1/2-Symmetry Thermal Models for HAC .................................... 3.4-9 Figure 3.4 Convection Boundary Conditions for HAC................................................... 3.4-10 Figure 3.4 Heat Transfer Coefficients for HAC Analyses (Fire) .................................... 3.4-11 Figure 3.4 Heat Transfer Coefficients for HAC Analyses (Post-Fire Cool Down) ........ 3.4-12 Figure 3.4 Charred Polyurethane Foam at End of the Fire ............................................. 3.4-13 Figure 3.4 HAC Fire Temperature Time-Histories (100W Volumetric Heat Source in 110-gallon Drum,, Helium Fill Gas) ......................................................... 3.4-14 Figure 3.4 HAC Fire Temperature Time-Histories (100W Surface Heat Flux, Helium Fill Gas) ............................................................................................ 3.4-14 Figure 3.4-7A - HAC Fire Temperature Time-Histories (100W Volumetric Heat Source in 55-gallon Drum in SIA, Helium Fill Gas)................................................ 3.4-15 Figure 3.4 HAC Transient Analysis Temperature Contour Plots (100W Volumetric Heat Load in 110-gallon Drum, Helium Fill Gas) ........................................ 3.4-16 Figure 3.4-8A - HAC Transient Analysis Temperature Contour Plots (100W Volumetric Heat Load in 55-gallon Drum in SIA, Helium Fill Gas) ............................... 3.4-17 Figure 3.4 HAC Transient Analysis Temperature Contour Plots (100W Surface Heat Flux on CCV Cavity ) ........................................................................... 3.4-18 Figure 3.5 Modified Damage HAC Thermal Model ......................................................... 3.5-7 NAC International 3-ii

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A List of Tables Table 3.1 Summary of Packaging Temperatures for NCT................................................ 3.1-5 Table 3.1 Summary of Packaging Temperatures for HAC ............................................... 3.1-5 Table 3.1 Summary of Maximum Pressures ..................................................................... 3.1-5 Table 3.2 Thermal Properties of Stainless Steel ............................................................... 3.2-2 Table 3.2-1A - Thermal Properties of Carbon Steel ............................................................... 3.2-2 Table 3.2 Thermal Properties of Polyurethane Foam ....................................................... 3.2-3 Table 3.2 Thermal Properties of ...................................................... 3.2-3 Table 3.2 Thermal Properties of Dry Air at Standard Pressure ........................................ 3.2-4 Table 3.2 Thermal Properties of Helium Gas at Standard Pressure .................................. 3.2-5 Table 3.2 Temperature Limits of Packaging Components ................................................ 3.2-5 Table 3.3 Nusselt Number Calculation Constants of a Cylinder in Cross Flow ............. 3.3-15 Table 3.3 Maximum Package Temperatures for NCT Heat............................................ 3.3-15 Table 3.3 Summary of Maximum Pressures for NCT .................................................... 3.3-15 Table 3.4 Maximum Package Temperatures for HAC ...................................................... 3.4-8 Table 3.4 Summary of HAC Pressures ............................................................................. 3.4-8 Table 3.5 Maximum HAC Package Temperatures vs. CCV Position in OP Cavity......... 3.5-6 Table 3.5 Maximum HAC Package Temperatures vs. Damage Model ............................ 3.5-6 NAC International 3-iii

This page intentionally left blank.

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A 3 THERMAL EVALUATION This section summarizes the thermal evaluation of the OPTIMUS-L package. TRU waste and irradiated fuel waste contents are evaluated for the Normal Conditions of Transport (NCT) and Hypothetical Accident Conditions (HAC) prescribed by 10 CFR 71 in Sections 3.3 and 3.4.

TRISO compact contents, which are limited to fresh (unirradiated) fuel, have no appreciable decay heat load. As such, maximum packaging component temperatures for TRISO contents are significantly lower than the maximum temperatures for TRU waste and irradiated fuel waste contents and no further thermal evaluation is required. The results of the thermal evaluation demonstrate that the packaging will remain within the applicable thermal limits, demonstrating the packages structural, containment and shielding integrity is not negatively affected during the NCT and HAC.

NAC International 3-1

This page intentionally left blank.

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A 3.1 Description of Thermal Design The OPTIMUS L packaging, shown in Figure 1.1-1, consists of a Cask Containment Vessel (CCV) within an Outer Packaging (OP). An optional Shield Insert Assembly (SIA) may be used inside the CCV to provide supplemental shielding for some contents. Narrative descriptions of these components are provided in Section 3.1.1.

When used to transport unirradiated TRISO compact contents, the packaging is configured with the GEO basket assembly inside the CCV cavity. The GEO basket assembly is described in Chapter 1 and does not include any special thermal design features. As such, the GEO basket assembly is not included in the following discussions in this chapter.

3.1.1 Design Features Containment of the radioactive contents is provided by the CCV. Impact and thermal protection for the CCV is provided by the OP. The SIA is placed inside the CCV cavity for contents that require additional shieling. All details and relevant dimensions of the packaging components are provided in the Licensing Drawings in Appendix 1.3.3.

CCV Design Features The CCV is the primary containment boundary of the package.

The CCV lid is machined to include operating and containment features, such as a port for evacuation and backfill of the cavity with inert gas and O-ring grooves to provide a leaktight seal.

OP Design Features The OP is comprised of a base and lid that form an internal cavity inside which the CCV is placed. The OP base and lid are both constructed of stainless steel shells that are filled with structural evaluation presented in Chapter 2 shows the OP bolts do not fail during the HAC free drop and HAC puncture tests.

SIA Design Features The SIA is a painted carbon steel weldment that is provided in two different configurations:

1-inch and 21/4-inch SIAs. Both SIAs consist of an open-top cylindrical cavity (sized to accommodate a 55-gallon drum) formed by a cylindrical shell with an integral bottom support NAC International 3.1-1

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A structure. The 1-inch and 21/4-inch SIA side wall thicknesses correspond to the SIA designation (i.e., 1-inch and 2 1/4-inch thick, respectively.) The top end of the SIA cavity includes a flared region that serves as a lead-in for content loading operations and provides clearance for handling grapples (e.g., drum thongs.) The SIA bottom support structure consists of a bottom plate, with thickness corresponding to the SIA designation (i.e., 1-inch and 2 1/4-inch thick, respectively),

that forms the bottom of the SIA cavity, and a support ring and gusset plates that serves as shoring to center the SIA within the CCV cavity and position the SIA top end near the top of the CCV cavity. The 21/4-inch SIA also has a painted carbon steel 3/4-inch thick annular spacer plate attached to its bottom end.

3.1.2 Contents Decay Heat The total decay heat of the contents is limited to 100 watts. For contents with a total decay heat that exceeds 50 watts the CCV cavity must be filled with helium gas. When the total content heat load does not exceed 50 watts the CCV cavity may be filled with air.

3.1.3 Summary Table of Temperatures Thermal design criteria are specified for the packaging components that are significant to the shielding and containment design. All operating temperature limits are based on the performance requirements of the individual packaging components. These operating temperature limits of the package components that are significant to the shielding and containment design are outlined in Table 3.2 6, including the temperature requirements for maximum temperature on the package accessible surfaces that are specified in 10CFR71.43(g).

Note that temperature limit is not required for the waste contents.

Normal Conditions of Transport Per the requirements of 10 CFR 71.71(c)(1), the package is evaluated for NCT. Specifically, steady-state thermal analyses are performed simulating exposure of the package to a 100°F temperature with insolation. As discussed in Section 3.3.1, the package is evaluated for NCT using the maximum allowable total content heat load of 100 watts with helium fill gas inside the CCV cavity and a reduced total content heat load of 50 watts with air filling the CCV cavity.

The thermal response of the packaging and contents under NCT may vary with the packaging configuration and content thermal mass. Contents can range from waste in a large secondary container (e.g., a 110-gallon drum) that fills the CCV cavity to waste in a much smaller secondary container drum (e.g., a 55-gallon drum) surrounded by shoring or inside a SIA within the CCV cavity. In addition, contents can range from small volumes with large gas-filled void spaces and small thermal mass to large volumes with little gas-filled void space and large thermal mass. Therefore, to bound the maximum package temperatures for the wide range of NAC International 3.1-2

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A possible contents and configurations, thermal analyses are performed for two (2) different content configurations:

(1) Uniformly distributed volumetric heat source from waste filling a 110-gallon drum in the CCV cavity, (2) Uniformly distributed volumetric heat source from waste filling a 55-gallon drum inside the cavity of a 21/4-inch SIA in the CCV cavity, and In addition, for the 100-watt heat load, a uniformly distributed surface heat flux on the inside of the CCV cavity is also evaluated.

The maximum temperatures of several key packaging components for NCT heat are summarized and compared with their allowable temperatures in Table 3.1-1.

As shown in Table 3.1-1, all packaging components remain well below their allowable temperatures for NCT. The results show that the maximum temperature of the CCV assembly is only 213°F (100°C) for NCT, which is much lower than the 800°F (427°C) temperature limit for stainless steel. The results also show that maximum temperature of the CCV O-ring seal, which is of primary interest for NCT, is only 208°F (98°C), compared to the continuous service temperature limit of 400°F (204°C) for Therefore, when exposed to NCT, the structural, containment, and shielding performances of the package will not be adversely affected by the temperatures experienced under these conditions. The maximum volumetric average temperature of the CCV fill gas for NCT heat is 235°F (113°C) for the maximum content decay heat of 100 watts with helium fill gas in the CCV cavity and 248°F (120°C) for content decay heat of 50 watts with air in the CCV cavity. These temperatures are used to determine the maximum internal pressure developed inside the CCV for NCT heat, as discussed in Section 3.3.2.

The maximum temperature of the accessible surface of the package, when exposed to an ambient temperature of 100°F in still air and shade, is 112°F (45°C). These temperatures are below the 185°F (85°C) exclusive use temperature limit required by 10 CFR 71.43(g).

Hypothetical Accident Conditions Per the requirements of 10 CFR 71.73(c)(4), the package is evaluated for the HAC thermal test (i.e., HAC fire). As discussed in Section 3.4.3, the package is evaluated for the HAC fire using the maximum allowable total content heat load of 100 watts with helium fill gas inside the CCV cavity and a reduced total content heat load of 50 watts with air filling the CCV cavity.

Furthermore, analyses are performed for the HAC fire for the same three (3) configurations evaluated for NCT, as described above. In addition, because the package may be in any orientation during the HAC fire, analyses are performed for the HAC fire with the CCV NAC International 3.1-3

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A positioned at the top end, middle, and bottom end of the OP cavity, as described in Section 3.5.2.2.

The maximum temperatures of several key packaging components for the HAC fire are summarized and compared to their allowable temperatures in Table 3.1-2. The polyurethane foam is not required to survive the HAC fire; therefore, it is not included in the summary. The impact limiter shells/plates are only required to maintain confinement of the polyurethane foam; therefore, they are only required to remain below their respective melting temperatures during the HAC fire.

As shown in Table 3.1-2, the packaging components remain below their allowable temperatures for the HAC fire. The results show that the CCV assembly reaches a peak temperature of 361°F (183°C) during the HAC fire transient, which is much lower than the 800°F (427°C) temperature limit for stainless steel. The results also show that the maximum temperature of the CCV O-ring seal only reaches 229°F (110°C) during the HAC fire, compared to the continuous service temperature limit of 400°F (204°C) for Therefore, when exposed to HAC, the structural, containment, and shielding performance of the package will not be adversely affected by the temperatures experienced under these conditions. The maximum volumetric average temperature of the CCV fill gas during the HAC fire is 271°F (133°C) for the maximum content decay heat of 100 watts with helium fill gas in the CCV cavity and 281°F (139°C) for content decay heat of 50 watts with air in the CCV cavity. These temperatures are used to determine the maximum internal pressure developed inside the CCV for HAC, as discussed in Section 3.4.3.2.

3.1.4 Summary Table of Maximum Pressures The summary of maximum pressures is provided in Table 3.1-3 for NCT and HAC, based on the pressure calculation results presented in Sections 3.3.2 and 3.4.3.2, respectively. The maximum internal pressure for the package is 21.8 psi (150 kPa) gauge for NCT and 36.9 psi (254 kPa) gauge for HAC. The Maximum Normal Operating Pressure (MNOP) of the package is 100 psi (690 kPa) gauge. The maximum HAC pressure calculated in Section 4.3.1 and used in the structural evaluation in Chapter 2 is 225 psi (1,551 kPa) gauge.

NAC International 3.1-4

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A NAC International 3.5-5

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Table 3.5 Maximum HAC Package Temperatures vs. CCV Position in OP Cavity Table 3.5 Maximum HAC Package Temperatures vs. Damage Model NAC International 3.5-6

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Figure 3.5 Modified Damage HAC Thermal Model NAC International 3.5-7

This page intentionally left blank.

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A 4.2 Containment Under Normal Conditions of Transport 4.2.1 NCT Pressurization of the Containment Vessel The package maximum normal operating pressure (MNOP) is 100 psi (690 kPa) gauge, based on the definition of a Type B(U) packaging. Section 3.3.2 further discusses the NCT pressurization for TRU waste contents.

4.2.2 NCT Containment Criterion The package is designed to a leaktight containment criterion per ANSI N14.5 [4.3]. Therefore, the containment criterion is 10-7 ref cm3/s.

4.2.3 Compliance with NCT Containment Criterion Compliance with the NCT containment criterion is demonstrated by analysis. The structural evaluation in Section 2.6 shows there would be no loss or dispersal of radioactive contents, and that the containment boundary, seal region, and closure bolts do not undergo any inelastic deformation when subjected to the conditions of 10 CFR 71.71. The thermal evaluation in Section 3.3.1 shows the seals, bolts and containment system materials of construction do not exceed their temperature limits when subjected to the conditions of 10 CFR 71.71.

NAC International 4.2-1

This page intentionally left blank.

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A 4.3 Containment Under Hypothetical Accident Conditions 4.3.1 HAC Pressurization of the Containment Vessel The containment evaluation for HAC is performed assuming the maximum package pressure is 225 psi (1,551 kPa) gauge for TRU Waste contents.

4.3.2 HAC Containment Criterion The packaging is designed to a leaktight containment criterion per ANSI N14.5 [4.3].

Therefore, the containment criterion is 10-7 ref cm3/s.

4.3.3 Compliance with HAC Containment Criterion Compliance with the HAC containment criterion is demonstrated by analysis. The structural evaluation in Section 2.7 shows there would be no loss or dispersal of radioactive contents, and that the containment boundary, seal region, and closure bolts do not undergo any inelastic deformation when subjected to the conditions of 10 CFR 71.73. The thermal evaluation in Section 3.4.3 shows the seals, bolts and containment system materials of construction do not exceed their temperature limits when subjected to the conditions of 10 CFR 71.73.

NAC International 4.3-1

This page intentionally left blank.

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A cavity. The 55-gallon drum includes a lid canister filter with a hydrogen diffusivity rate of 1.48E-05 mole/sec/mol fraction, known based on test data. The user has determined based on process/historical knowledge, measurement/sampling, radiography, and/or visual inspection that the content decay heat is 0.5 watts with a 50 to 60% void volume. The user has not inerted the CCV cavity with helium gas prior to shipment (i.e., the CCV cavity is filled with air), as allowed when the total content heat load does not exceed 50 watts.

1. Determine the volumes of the outermost and innermost confinement regions

a. The outermost region free volume is equal to the bare CCV cavity (See Table 7.5-3) minus the 55-gallon (208 L) drum and 60 L shoring volumes:

V 618 L 208 L 60 L

b. The innermost region free volume is equal to the inner most region volume times the determined void volume. The void volume in the container is determined to be 50-60%

of the 55-gallon drum, so to ensure a conservative calculation, the minimum void volume (50%) must be assumed:

V 208 L 0.5

2. Determine bounding G-values of contents

a. For this example, dose-dependent G-values are not used. This assumes that either the 0.012 watt-year criterion has not been met or the radiation is primarily gamma. From Table 4.5-2, the bounding hydrogen gas G-value for PVC is:

molecules G 0.7 100 eV

b. The G-value data source is for a temperature of 70°F (294 K). In this example, the content heat load is 0.5 watts and the cavity if filled with air, so the maximum temperature of the contents for the Air Fill ( 50W) case for the bare cask (Assy. -99) configuration from Table 7.5-3 is conservatively used. a Accounting for the maximum content temperature for NCT heat (120°C = 393 K) and the minimum content temperature for NCT cold (-40°C = 233 K), the temperature-adjusted G-values for hot and cold conditions are:

a A lower content temperature of 70C for NCT heat based on the 0.5 watt content heat load with air fill gas could be used for this example as discussed in Attachment 7.5-3.

NAC International 4.5-13

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR November 2021 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 0 molecules G 0.7 e 2.554 100 eV molecules G 0.7 e 0.182 100 eV

c. The Flammable Gas Generation Rate (FGGR) is based on the G-value and content decay heat.

molecules 0.5 W 2.554 mol FGGR 100 eV 1.32 10 100 molecules Ws s 6.022 10 1.602 10 mol eV molecules 0.5 W 0.182 mol FGGR 100 eV 9.45 10 100 molecules Ws s 6.022 10 1.602 10 mol eV

3. Determine release rates for each confinement region

a. As discussed in the problem statement, the drum is equipped with a fixed lid canister filter with unknown hydrogen diffusivity of 1.48E-05 mole/sec/mol fraction. This value is temperature adjusted for the hot and cold cases as:

393 RR 1.48 10 2.40 10 298 233 RR 1.48 10 9.62 10 298

b. Because there is only one boundary, the effective release rate (Teff) is equal to the release rate of the vent on the secondary container.

mol T , RR 2.40 10 s mol fraction mol T , RR 9.62 10 s mol fraction

4. Determine permissible transport time.

In this example, the CCV is filled with air, so the maximum hydrogen gas concentration is limited to 5 vol%. The time to reach 5 vol% concentration in the innermost region for the hot and cold cases are calculated and the transport time is set as 1/2 of the shorter time between the two. The equation for the hydrogen gas accumulation for duration t (in seconds) is:

NAC International 4.5-14

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A AS ASe BSt X t A B A B A B The parameters S, A, and B for the hot and cold cases as well as the duration to reach 5 vol%

hydrogen in the inner most confinement region, are listed below.

Hot Case - Cold Case mol mol FGGR 1.32 10 s FGGR 9.45 10 S 3.071 10 S s 2.192 10 n n 1 atm 104L 1 atm 104L atm L atm L 294 K 0.08206 294 K 0.08206 mol K mol K mol mol T 2.40 10 T 9.62 10 A s mol fraction 5.572 10 A s mol fraction 2.232 10 n n 1 atm 104L 1 atm 104L atm L atm L 294 K 0.08206 294 K 0.08206 mol K mol K mol mol T 2.40 10 T 9.62 10 B s mol fraction 1.656 10 B s mol fraction 6.632 10 n n 1 atm 350 L 1 atm 350 L atm L atm L 294 K 0.08206 294 K 0.08206 mol K mol K X, . 0.05 X, . 0.05 Transport Time - As the shorter time is set from the hot case, one half of this time is 38 days.

4.5.4.4.2 Example 2 - Bare Cask with 55-Gallon Drum in a 110-Gallon Drum This example illustrates how to account for nested containment volumes and calculation of flammable gas generation for water, which is not dose dependent and only requires a cold case.

In this hypothetical example, a user is making a shipment with the OPTIMUS-L package transporting a damaged 55-gallon drum repackaged inside a 110-gallon drum, both equipped with a lid canister filter with a hydrogen diffusivity rate of 1.48E-05 mole/sec/mol fraction based on the product data sheet for the filter. The user has determined based on process/historical knowledge, measurement/sampling, radiography, and/or visual inspection that the 55-gallon drum contains a solidified material with an inorganic binder and up to 10 wt% unbound water, with a 20-40% void volume and a total content decay heat load of 4.5 watts. The user has not inerted the CCV cavity with helium gas prior to shipment (i.e., the CCV cavity is filled with air),

as allowed when the total content heat load does not exceed 50 watts.

NAC International 4.5-15

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A

1. Determine the volumes of the outermost and innermost confinement regions

a. The outermost region free volume is equal to the bare CCV cavity (See Table 7.5-3) minus the 110-gallon (416 L) drum:

V 618 L 416 L

b. The innermost region free volume is equal to the inner most region volume times the determined void volume. The void volume in the container is determined to be 20-40%

of the 55-gallon drum,a so to ensure a conservative calculation the minimum void volume (20%) must be assumed:

V 208 L 0.2 .

2. Determine bounding G-values of contents

a. For this example, the hydrogen producing material is water, for which dose-dependent G-values are not used, so:

molecules G 1.6 0.1 0.16 100 eV

b. Per Section 2.4.2 of NUREG/CR-6673, the G-value of water is temperature independent, so no adjustment is required.

c. The Flammable Gas Generation Rate (FGGR) is based on the G-value and content decay heat.

molecules 4.5 W 0.16 mol FGGR 100 eV 7.46 10 100 s

molecules Ws 6.022 10 mo 1.602 10 eV l

3. Determine release rates for each confinement region

a. As discussed in the problem statement, both the 55-gallon drum and 110-gallon drum are equipped with a removable lid canister filter with a known hydrogen diffusivity of 1.48E-05 mole/sec/mol fraction. This value is temperature-adjusted for the cold case as shown below. Note that, because there is no increase in Geff with increasing temperature, there is no need to consider the hot case here. Only the lower release rate for the cold case (-40°F) is relevant:

a Recall that the intermediate volume (between the 55-gallon drum and 110-gallon drum) is not considered for the gas generation calculations.

NAC International 4.5-16

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR November 2021 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 0 233 RR 1.48 10 9.62 10 298

b. Because there are two boundaries, the effective release rate (Teff) through the two filters is:

RR RR mol T 4.81 10 RR RR s mol fraction

4. Determine permissible transport time In this example, the CCV is filled with air, so the maximum hydrogen gas concentration is limited to 5 vol%. The time to reach 5 vol% concentration in the innermost region is calculated and the transport time is set as 1/2 of this time, using the equation:

AS ASe BSt X t A B A B A B The parameters S, A, and B, as well as the duration to reach 5 vol% hydrogen in the inner most confinement region, are calculated as:

mol FGGR 7.46 10 S s 4.328 10 n

1 atm 41.6L atm L 294 K 0.08206 mol K mol T 4.81 10 A s mol fraction 2.790 10 n

1 atm 41.6L atm L 294 K 0.08206 mol K mol T 4.81 10 B s mol fraction 5.746 10 n

1 atm 202L atm L 294 K 0.08206 mol K X, . 0.05 Transport Time - In this example, the permissible transport time (shipping window) is equal to 1/2 of the time for the cold case, or 30 days.

4.5.4.4.3 Example 3 - 21/4-inch SIA with 55-Gallon Drum This example illustrates how to account for the packaging configuration in the free-volume calculations and use of dose-dependent G-values for the gas generation rate calculation.

NAC International 4.5-17

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A In this hypothetical example, a user is making a shipment with the OPTIMUS-L package configured with the 21/4-inch SIA loaded with a 55-gallon drum containing polyethylene material.

The 55-gallon drum is equipped with a fixed lid canister filter with unknown hydrogen diffusivity. The user has determined that the drum contents have a 40 to 50% void volume, the content decay heat is 0.1 watts with 80% radiation from / emitters and 20% from emitters, and that the contents are being loaded after 0.012 watt-years (i.e., dose-dependent G-values may be used). The user has not inerted the CCV cavity with helium gas prior to shipment (i.e., the CCV cavity is filled with air), as allowed when the total content heat load does not exceed 50 watts.

1. Determine the volumes of the outermost and innermost confinement regions

a. The outermost region free volume is equal to the CCV with 21/4-inch SIA (See Table 7.5-

3) minus the 55-gallon (208 L) drum and shoring volume is:

V 475 L 208 L L

b. The innermost region free volume is equal to the inner most region volume times the determined void volume. The void volume in the container is determined to be 40-50%

of the 55-gallon drum, so to ensure a conservative calculation the minimum void volume (40%) must be assumed:

V 208 L 0.4 .

2. Determine bounding G-values of contents

a. For this example, dose dependent G-values are used, implying that the 0.012 watt-year criterion has been met. From Table 4.5-2, the G-value of polyethylene is (0.64 for and 4.1 for ):

molecules G 0.8 0.64 0.2 4.1 1.332 100 eV

b. The G-value data source is for a temperature of 70°F (294 K). In this example, the content heat load is 0.1 watts and the cavity if filled with helium, so the maximum temperature of the contents for the Air Fill ( 50W) case for the 21/4-inch SIA (Assy. -97) configuration from Table 7.5-3 is conservatively used. a Accounting for the maximum content temperature for NCT heat (103°C = 376 K) and the minimum content temperature for NCT cold (-40°C = 233 K), the temperature-adjusted G-values for hot and cold conditions are:

a A lower content temperature of 70C for NCT heat based on the 0.1 watt content heat load with helium fill gas could be used for this example as discussed in Attachment 7.5-3.

NAC International 4.5-18

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A

b. The innermost region free volume is equal to the inner most region volume times the determined void volume. The void volume in the container is determined to be 60-70%

of the 55-gallon drum, so to ensure a conservative calculation the minimum void volume (60%) must be assumed:

V 208 L 0.6 .

2. Determine bounding G-values of contents

a. For this example, dose dependent G-values are used, implying that the 0.012 watt-year criterion has been met. From Table 4.5-2, the G-value of polyethylene is (0.64 for and 4.1 for ):

molecules G 0.8 0.64 0.2 4.1 1.332 100 eV

b. The G-value data source is for a temperature of 70°F (294 K). In this example, the content heat load is 0.1 watts and the cavity if filled with helium, so the maximum temperature of the contents for the He Fill ( 100W) case for the 21/4-inch SIA (Assy. -97) configuration from Table 7.5-3 is conservatively used. a Accounting for the maximum content temperature for NCT heat (106°C = 379 K) and the minimum content temperature for NCT cold (-40°C = 233 K), the temperature-adjusted G-values for hot and cold conditions are:

molecules G 1.332 e 1.811 100 eV molecules G 1.332 e 0.931 100 eV

c. The Flammable Gas Generation Rate (FGGR) is based on the G-value and content decay heat.

molecules 0.1 W 1.811 mol FGGR 100 eV 1.88 10 100 molecules Ws s 6.022 10 1.602 10 mol eV molecules 0.1 W 0.931 mol FGGR 100 eV 9.65 10 100 molecules Ws s 6.022 10 1.602 10 mol eV a A lower content temperature of 70C for NCT heat based on the 0.1 watt content heat load and helium fill gas could be used for this example as discussed in Attachment 7.5-3.

NAC International 4.5-21

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR November 2021 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 0

3. Determine release rates for each confinement region

a. As discussed in the problem statement, the drum is equipped with a fixed lid canister filter with unknown hydrogen diffusivity. Therefore, the release rate of a fixed lid canister filter from Table 4.5-3 of 1.48E-05 mole/sec/mol fraction is used in the calculation. This value is temperature adjusted for the hot and cold cases as:

379 RR 1.48 10 2.25 10 298 233 RR 1.48 10 9.62 10 298

b. Because there is only one boundary, the effective release rate (Teff) is equal to the release rate of the vent on the secondary container.

mol T , RR 2.25 10 s mol fraction mol T , RR 9.62 10 s mol fraction

4. Determine permissible transport time.

In this example, the CCV is filled with air, so the maximum hydrogen gas concentration is limited to 5 vol%. The hot and cold case time to reach 5 vol% concentration in the innermost region are calculated and the transport time is set as 1/2 of the shorter time between the two.

The equation for the hydrogen gas accumulation for duration t (in seconds) is:

AS ASe BSt X t A B A B A B The parameters S, A, and B for the hot and cold cases, as well as the duration to reach 5 vol% hydrogen in the inner most confinement region, are listed below.

NAC International 4.5-22

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR November 2021 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 0 Hot Case - Cold Case mol mol FGGR 1.88 10 s FGGR 9.65 10 s S 3.629 10 S 1.865 10 n n 1 atm 124.8 L 1 atm 124.8L atm L atm L 294 K 0.08206 294 K 0.08206 mol K mol K mol T 9.62 10 T 2.25 10 A 1.860 10 A s mol fraction 4.358 10 n n 1 atm 124.8 L 1 atm 124.8 L atm L atm L 294 K 0.08206 294 K 0.08206 mol K mol K mol T 9.62 10 T 2.25 10 B 8.694 10 B s mol fraction 2.037 10 n n 1 atm 267L 1 atm 267L atm L atm L 294 K 0.08206 294 K 0.08206 mol K mol K X, . 0.08 X, . 0.08 Transport Time - In this example, the permissible transport time (shipping window) is equal to 1/2 of the shortest time above, or 398 days for the hot case. However, the permissible shipping time cannot exceed 1 year. Therefore, the shipping window is limited to 365 days.

4.5.5 Pressure Calculations for TRU Waste Pressure calculations for TRU waste under NCT and HAC are presented in Sections 3.3.2 and 3.4.3.2, respectively.

NAC International 4.5-23

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Table 4.5 TRU Waste Contents - Flammability Limits Oxygen from Hydrogen from Total Radiolysis Flammability Cavity Gas Radiolysis Radiolysis Gases Limit (vol% O2) (vol% H2) (vol%)

Helium 5.0 vol% O2 4.0 8.0 12.0 Air 5.0 vol% H2 2.5 5.0 7.5 Table 4.5 TRU Waste Maximum Hydrogen G-Values and Activation Energies Dose Dependent Bounding Hydrogen Activation Material Hydrogen Gas G-Value(1) Gas G-Value(2) Energy (molecules/100 eV @70°F) (molecules/100 eV @70°F) (kcal/mole)

Water 1.6x (3) 1.6x (3)

Polyethylene 0.64 4.1 0.8 Polyvinyl Chloride 0.50 0.7 3.0 Cellulose 1.09 3.2 2.1 Organic Resins 1.09 1.7 2.1 Other Polymers 1.09 4.1 0.8 Notes:

1. Used for dose dependent G-values for and radiation.

2. Used for non-dose dependent G-values and dose dependent G-values for radiation.

3. x is the mass fraction of water in the waste.

Reference [4.9], Tables 2.2-1 and 2.2-2 Table 4.5 TRU Waste Minimum Hydrogen Release Rates Hydrogen Diffusion Coefficient Confinement Layer (Release Rate) at 298 K (25°C) (mole/sec/mole fraction)

Breather Vent on Can 5.18E-06 Filtered Bag 1.08E-05 Fold-and Tape or twist-and tape liner bag 4.67E-06(1)

Heat Sealed Bag See Equation Above Inner drum liner filter 3.70E-06 Drum Filter 3.70E-06 Fixed lid canister filter (high diffusivity) 9.34E-05 Fixed lid canister filter 1.48E-05 Removable lid canister filter 1.48E-05 Notes:

1. Release rate is valid for all temperatures.

Reference [4.9], Table 2.5-1 NAC International 4.5-24

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR November 2021 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 0 5.1 Description of Shielding Design 5.1.1 Shielding Design Features The packaging design is comprised of two primary components: the cask containment vessel (CCV), a protective outer packaging (OP). The assembly of these components is shown in Figure 1-1. Narrative descriptions of these components are provided below in Sections 5.1.1.1 and 5.1.1.2. The design features of the packaging that are credited for radiation shielding are listed in Table 5.1-1.

The CCV and OP body and lid components are composed of ASME plate and forging materials.

The permissible variation under the specified thickness for ASME plate material is 0.01 inches

[5.1].

5.1.1.1 CCV Shielding Design Features 5.1.1.2 Outer Packaging Shielding Design Features The OP is comprised of two parts: a base and lid. Both the OP Base and OP Lid are comprised of inner and outer stainless steel shells encapsulating structural support components (e.g. foam and support plates). Any radiation shielding provided by any supporting components beyond the minimum polyurethane foam and stainless steel thickness is neglected (See discussion in Section 5.3.1.1).

5.1.1.3 Supplemental Shield Insert Assemblies The 1-inch and 21/4-inch thick Shield Insert Assembly (SIA) designs may be used to provide additional shielding and increase the maximum isotopic activities for a package centered on the trailer. Note only the body of the 21/4-inch SIA is installed in the packaging, not the lid. The shielding analysis of a centered package array with the SIAs is provided in Appendix 5.5.2.

5.1.2 Summary of Maximum Radiation Levels The package is transported solely as an exclusive use shipment; thus, no transportation index is calculated. Instead, the dose rate limits specified in 10 CFR 71.47(b) are met for NCT and the dose rate limits specified in 10 CFR 71.51(a)(2) are met for HAC. The trailer surface, 2-meter, NAC International 5.1-1

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A and cab (occupied position) dose rates are only calculated from the side of the package, as the package is only transported in the upright position.

For TRU waste, the contents of the package are variable, and the final isotope inventory is different for each TRU waste drum or irradiated fuel waste liner, the maximum dose rates are strongly dependent on the specific contents. As an example, maximum dose rates are calculated for the maximum allowable quantity of two individual isotopes. The two isotopes considered are Co-60 and Cf-252. Examples of the maximum activity in a package of the conveyance that would result in the limiting dose rate at 90% of the regulatory limit are provided in Table 5.1-2, along with the resulting total dose rates at each location. It should be noted from this table that, due to the relatively thin layers of shielding provided by the packaging, the maximum isotopic activities permissible in the contents are very limited. The primary content intended for transport in the package is drums of TRU waste with relatively low activity. Thus, the relative hazard of the contents is limited.

NAC International 5.1-2

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A 5.2 Source Specification For TRU materials, the radionuclide inventories of the contents are highly variable and dependent on the individual TRU waste container. Thus, the neutron and gamma sources are dependent on the isotopic inventory of the contents. The isotopic inventory in each TRU waste container is characterized individually and is based on the waste materials in the specific contents. The neutron and gamma sources used for the dose rate analysis of the package are generic, so that the dose rates of specific contents can be determined based on the generic source terms analyzed.

Dose rates are calculated individually for gamma and neutron energy groups, so that with the calculated energy group dose rates and the isotopic inventory from a specific content, bounding dose rates can be calculated individually for each shipment. The individual dose rate calculations are for each energy group, G, based on the photon and neutron source spectra groups listed below in Table 5.2-1 and Table 5.2-2. The dose rate calculation for each energy group considers a monoenergetic source at the upper bound of the group (e.g., for the 0.1 to 0.2 MeV group, the source energy is 0.2 MeV).

For each TRU waste container, the contents are characterized, such that there is a specific isotopic inventory per contents. For each isotope in the contents, a dose rate is determined based on the calculated energy group dose rates and a grouped source spectrum of the isotope, as calculated in the ORIGEN module of the SCALE code package, version 6.2 [5.2]. With the dose rate contribution of each isotope calculated, compliance is verified by summing the contribution from all isotopes in the TRU waste container inventory.

The isotopic inventories of the characterized contents are considered current at the time of transport. Thus, there is no concern of an increase in source term over time during the transport.

TRISO content is composed of fresh, unirradiated fuel and contains no significant radionuclide inventory.

5.2.1 Gamma Source The gamma energy groups shown in Table 5.2-1 are based on a generic grouping structure developed for this package. The source of each isotope in the contents is determined based on 1 Ci of activity, using the ORIGEN code. ORIGEN groups the gamma emissions into the energy groups shown in Table 5.2-1 for a defined gamma source from 1 Ci of the specific isotope, accounting for both gammas that are directly emitted and from Bremsstrahlung. Using the bounding calculated dose rates for each energy group, the dose rate contribution from each isotope is determined, and with the isotopic inventory of the contents, the total external dose rates can be calculated. As an example, the ORIGEN grouped Cf-252 gamma source is shown in Table 5.2-1.

NAC International 5.2-1

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR November 2021 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 0 5.2.2 Neutron Source The neutron energy groups shown in Table 5.2-2 are based on a generic grouping structure developed for this package. The source of each isotope in the contents is determined based on 1 Ci of activity, using the ORIGEN code. ORIGEN groups the neutron emissions into the energy groups shown in Table 5.2-2 for a defined neutron source from 1 Ci of the specific isotope, accounting for neutrons from both spontaneous fission and ,n reactions. Using the bounding calculated dose rates for each energy group, the dose rate contribution from each isotope is determined, and with the isotopic inventory of the contents, the total external dose rates can be calculated. As an example, the ORIGEN grouped Cf-252 neutron source is shown in Table 5.2-2.

NAC International 5.2-2

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Chapter 6 Criticality Evaluation Table of Contents 6 CRITICALITY EVALUATION ..................................................................................... 6-1 6.1 Description of Criticality Design .................................................................................. 6.1-1 6.1.1 Design Features ................................................................................................. 6.1-1 6.1.2 Summary Table of Criticality Evaluation ......................................................... 6.1-1 6.1.3 Criticality Safety Index ..................................................................................... 6.1-1 6.2 Package Contents .......................................................................................................... 6.2-1 6.2.1 FGE Cases ......................................................................................................... 6.2-1 6.2.2 FEM Cases ........................................................................................................ 6.2-2 6.3 General Considerations ................................................................................................. 6.3-1 6.3.1 Model Configuration ......................................................................................... 6.3-1 6.3.2 Material Properties ............................................................................................ 6.3-7 6.3.3 Computer Codes and Cross-Section Libraries ................................................ 6.3-10 6.3.4 Demonstration of Maximum Reactivity ......................................................... 6.3-10 6.4 Single Package Evaluation ............................................................................................ 6.4-1 6.4.1 FGE Single Package Configuration .................................................................. 6.4-1 6.4.2 FGE Single Package Summary Results ............................................................ 6.4-1 6.4.3 FEM Single Package Configuration ................................................................. 6.4-9 6.4.4 FEM-1 Single Package Summary Results ........................................................ 6.4-9 6.5 Evaluation of Package Arrays Under Normal Conditions of Transport ....................... 6.5-1 6.5.1 FGE NCT Package Array Configuration .......................................................... 6.5-1 6.5.2 FGE NCT Package Array Results..................................................................... 6.5-1 6.5.3 FEM NCT Package Array Configuration ....................................................... 6.5-12 6.5.4 FEM NCT Package Array Results .................................................................. 6.5-12 6.6 Package Arrays Under Hypothetical Accident Conditions........................................... 6.6-1 6.6.1 FGE HAC Package Array Configuration ......................................................... 6.6-1 6.6.2 FGE HAC Package Array Results .................................................................... 6.6-1 6.6.3 FEM HAC Package Array Configuration ....................................................... 6.6-14 6.6.4 FEM-1 HAC Package Array Summary Results.............................................. 6.6-14 6.7 Fissile Material Packages for Air Transport ................................................................. 6.7-1 6.8 Benchmark Evaluation .................................................................................................. 6.8-1 6.8.1 Applicability of Benchmark Experiments ........................................................ 6.8-1 6.8.2 Bias Determination ........................................................................................... 6.8-4 6.9 Criticality Evaluation for TRISO Fuel .......................................................................... 6.9-1 6.9.1 Description of Criticality Design ................................................................... 6.9.1-1 6.9.2 Package Contents ........................................................................................... 6.9.2-1 NAC International 6-i

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A 6.9.3 General Considerations .................................................................................. 6.9.3-1 6.9.4 Single Package Evaluation ............................................................................. 6.9.4-1 6.9.5 Evaluation of Package Arrays Under Normal Conditions of Transport ........ 6.9.5-1 6.9.6 Package Arrays Under Hypothetical Accident Conditions............................ 6.9.6-1 6.9.7 Fissile Material Packages for Air Transport .................................................. 6.9.7-1 6.9.8 Benchmark Evaluation ................................................................................... 6.9.8-1 6.10 Appendix ..................................................................................................................... 6.10-1 6.10.1 References ....................................................................................................... 6.10-1 NAC International 6-ii

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR November 2021 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 0 List of Figures Figure 6.3 MCNP6 Model Packaging Geometry .............................................................. 6.3-5 Figure 6.3 Single Package Model ..................................................................................... 6.3-5 Figure 6.3 Baseline Package Array Model........................................................................ 6.3-6 Figure 6.3 Single Package Fissile Shape Positions ......................................................... 6.3-19 Figure 6.3 Package Array Fissile Shape Positions .......................................................... 6.3-19 Figure 6.3 Fissile Sphere Positioning for NCT Package Arrays ..................................... 6.3-20 Figure 6.3 Fissile Sphere Positioning for HAC Package Arrays .................................... 6.3-20 Figure 6.3 Floodable Regions: (1) OP Region (2) Interspersed Region ......................... 6.3-21 Figure 6.3 FEM Homogeneous Volume Cases - Single Package and HAC Package Array ............................................................................................................... 6.3-21 Figure 6.3 FEM Homogeneous Volume Cases - NCT Package Array ........................ 6.3-21 Figure 6.3 FEM Fissile Heterogeneous Cylindrical Particle Cases .............................. 6.3-22 Figure 6.3 FEM Fissile Heterogeneous Spherical Particle Cases ................................. 6.3-23 Figure 6.4 FGE-1 Single Package Baseline Study ............................................................ 6.4-6 Figure 6.4 FGE-2a Single Package Baseline Study .......................................................... 6.4-6 Figure 6.4 FGE-2b Single Package Baseline Study .......................................................... 6.4-7 Figure 6.4 FGE-2c Single Package Baseline Study .......................................................... 6.4-7 Figure 6.4 FGE-3 Single Package Baseline Study ............................................................ 6.4-8 Figure 6.4 FGE-5 Single Package Baseline Study ............................................................ 6.4-8 Figure 6.4 FEM-1 Single Package Homogeneous Mass Study ...................................... 6.4-14 Figure 6.4 FEM-1 Single Package Heterogeneous Cylindrical Particle Study ............... 6.4-14 Figure 6.4 FEM-1 Single Package Heterogeneous Spherical Particle Study .................. 6.4-15 Figure 6.5 FGE-1 NCT Package Array Baseline Study .................................................... 6.5-7 Figure 6.5 FGE-2a NCT Package Array Baseline Study .................................................. 6.5-7 Figure 6.5 FGE-2b NCT Package Array Baseline Study .................................................. 6.5-8 Figure 6.5 FGE-2c NCT Package Array Baseline Study .................................................. 6.5-8 Figure 6.5 FGE-3 NCT Package Array Baseline Study .................................................... 6.5-9 Figure 6.5 FGE-5 NCT Package Array Baseline Study .................................................... 6.5-9 Figure 6.5-6A - FGE-1 NCT Package Array Moderator Variation Sensitivity .................... 6.5-10 Figure 6.5-6B - FGE-2a NCT Package Array Moderator Variation Sensitivity .................. 6.5-10 Figure 6.5-6C - FGE-2b NCT Package Array Moderator Variation Sensitivity .................. 6.5-11 Figure 6.5-6D - FGE-2c NCT Package Array Moderator Variation Sensitivity .................. 6.5-11 Figure 6.5 FEM-1 NCT Package Array Homogeneous Mass Study .............................. 6.5-17 Figure 6.5 FEM-1 NCT Package Array Heterogeneous Cylindrical Particle Study ....... 6.5-17 Figure 6.5 FEM-1 NCT Package Array Heterogeneous Spherical Particle Study.......... 6.5-18 Figure 6.6 FGE-1 HAC Package Array Baseline Study ................................................... 6.6-8 Figure 6.6 FGE-2a HAC Package Array Baseline Study.................................................. 6.6-8 Figure 6.6 FGE-2b HAC Package Array Baseline Study ................................................. 6.6-9 Figure 6.6 FGE-2c HAC Package Array Baseline Study.................................................. 6.6-9 Figure 6.6 FGE-3 HAC Package Array Baseline Study ................................................. 6.6-10 Figure 6.6 FGE-5 HAC Package Array Baseline Study ................................................. 6.6-10 Figure 6.6-6A - FGE-1 HAC Array Beryllium Moderator Study ........................................ 6.6-11 Figure 6.6-6B - FGE-2a HAC Array Beryllium Moderator Study ....................................... 6.6-11 Figure 6.6-6C - FGE-2b HAC Array Beryllium Moderator Study ....................................... 6.6-12 Figure 6.6-6D - FGE-2c HAC Array Beryllium Moderator Study ....................................... 6.6-12 NAC International 6-iii

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Figure 6.6-6E - FGE-3 HAC Array Beryllium Moderator Study ......................................... 6.6-13 Figure 6.6-6F - FGE-5 HAC Array Beryllium Moderator Study ......................................... 6.6-13 Figure 6.6 FEM-1 HAC Package Array Homogeneous Mass Study .............................. 6.6-19 Figure 6.6 FEM-1 HAC Package Array Heterogeneous Cylindrical Particle Study ...... 6.6-19 Figure 6.6 FEM-1 HAC Package Array Heterogeneous Spherical Particle Study ......... 6.6-20 Figure 6.8 keff vs. EALF - Plutonium Solution Systems without Beryllium Reflector .. 6.8-16 Figure 6.8 keff vs. H/(239Pu + 241Pu) - Plutonium Systems without Beryllium Reflector .......................................................................................................... 6.8-16 Figure 6.8 keff vs. Fissile Weight Percent - Plutonium Solution Systems without Beryllium Reflector ........................................................................................ 6.8-17 Figure 6.8 keff vs. EALF - Plutonium Solution Systems with Beryllium Reflector ....... 6.8-17 Figure 6.8 keff vs. H/(239Pu + 241Pu) - Plutonium Solution Systems with Beryllium Reflector .......................................................................................................... 6.8-18 Figure 6.8 keff vs. Fissile Weight Percent - Plutonium Solution Systems with Beryllium Reflector ........................................................................................ 6.8-18 Figure 6.8 keff vs. EALF - Low-Enriched Uranium Systems ......................................... 6.8-19 Figure 6.8 keff vs. H/235U - Low-Enriched Uranium Systems ........................................ 6.8-19 Figure 6.8 keff vs. 235U Weight Percent - Low-Enriched Uranium Systems................... 6.8-20 Figure 6.9.3 MCNP6 Model Packaging Geometry ........................................................ 6.9.3-3 Figure 6.9.3 MCNP6 Model with Basket Inserted - Axial Slice ................................... 6.9.3-4 Figure 6.9.3 MCNP6 Model with Basket Inserted - Radial Slice ................................. 6.9.3-5 Figure 6.9.3 Basket Moderator Density Study Results ................................................ 6.9.3-19 Figure 6.9.8 keff vs. 235U Enrichment - TRISO Benchmark ........................................... 6.9.8-6 Figure 6.9.8 keff vs. EALF - TRISO Benchmark ........................................................... 6.9.8-7 NAC International 6-iv

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR November 2021 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 0 List of Tables Table 6.1 Summary Table of FGE Criticality Evaluations ............................................... 6.1-2 Table 6.1 Summary Table of FEM Criticality Evaluations .............................................. 6.1-2 Table 6.2 Fissile Gram Equivalent Waste Content Cases ................................................. 6.2-3 Table 6.2 Fissile Equivalent Mass Waste Content Cases.................................................. 6.2-3 Table 6.2 Fissile Gram Equivalent Waste Content Case Description ............................... 6.2-4 Table 6.2 Fissile Equivalent Mass Waste Content Case Description ............................... 6.2-4 Table 6.3 OP Combined Directional Stainless Steel Thicknesses .................................... 6.3-3 Table 6.3 Damaged Packaging Axial Dimensions ............................................................ 6.3-3 Table 6.3 Damaged Packaging Radial Dimensions .......................................................... 6.3-4 Table 6.3-3A - Undamaged Packaging Axial Dimensions ..................................................... 6.3-4 Table 6.3-3B - Undamaged Packaging Radial Dimensions.................................................... 6.3-4 Table 6.3 Nuclear Properties of Type 304 Stainless Steel ................................................ 6.3-8 Table 6.3 Nuclear Properties of Materials ........................................................................ 6.3-9 Table 6.3 NCT Package Array Homogeneous Fissile Volume Study Configurations ... 6.3-18 Table 6.4 FGE Result Summary - Single Package............................................................ 6.4-3 Table 6.4 FGE-1 Baseline Configuration - Single Package ............................................. 6.4-3 Table 6.4 FGE-2a Baseline Configuration - Single Package ........................................... 6.4-3 Table 6.4 FGE-2b Baseline Configuration - Single Package ........................................... 6.4-4 Table 6.4 FGE-2c Baseline Configuration - Single Package ........................................... 6.4-4 Table 6.4 FGE-3 Baseline Configuration - Single Package ............................................. 6.4-4 Table 6.4 FGE-5 Baseline Configuration - Single Package ............................................. 6.4-5 Table 6.4 FGE Fissile Sphere Position Study Results - Single Package .......................... 6.4-5 Table 6.4 FGE Flooding Study Results - Single Package ................................................ 6.4-5 Table 6.4 FEM-1 Summary - Single Package .............................................................. 6.4-11 Table 6.4 FEM-1 Homogeneous Sphere Results - Single Package .............................. 6.4-11 Table 6.4 FEM-1 Bounding Case for Each Cylindrical Particle Size - Single Package ........................................................................................................... 6.4-12 Table 6.4 FEM-1 Bounding Cylindrical Particle Size - Single Package ...................... 6.4-12 Table 6.4 FEM-1 Bounding Case for Each Spherical Particle Size - Single Package ........................................................................................................... 6.4-12 Table 6.4 FEM-1 Bounding Spherical Particle Size - Single Package ......................... 6.4-13 Table 6.4 FEM-1 Fissile Position Study Results - Single Package .............................. 6.4-13 Table 6.4 FEM-1 Flooding Study Results - Single Package ........................................ 6.4-13 Table 6.5 FGE Result Summary - NCT Package Array ................................................... 6.5-4 Table 6.5 FGE-1, 2a, 2b, and 2c Baseline Configurations - NCT Package Array ........... 6.5-4 Table 6.5 FGE-3 Baseline Configuration - NCT Package Array ..................................... 6.5-4 Table 6.5 FGE-5 Baseline Configuration - NCT Package Array ..................................... 6.5-5 Table 6.5 FGE Fissile Sphere Position Study Results - NCT Package Array .................. 6.5-5 Table 6.5-5A - FGE Moderation Variation Seneitivity Study Results - NCT Package Array . 6.5-5 Table 6.5-5B - FGE Reflector Density Reduction Study Results - NCT Package Array ........ 6.5-6 Table 6.5 FEM-1 Summary - NCT Package Array ........................................................ 6.5-14 Table 6.5 FEM-1 Homogeneous Sphere Results - NCT Package Array........................ 6.5-14 Table 6.5 FEM-1 Bounding Case for Each Cylindrical Particle Size - NCT Package Array ............................................................................................................... 6.5-15 NAC International 6-v

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Table 6.5 FEM-1 Bounding Cylindrical Particle Size - NCT Package Array ................ 6.5-15 Table 6.5 FEM-1 Bounding Case for Each Spherical Particle Size - NCT Package Array ............................................................................................................... 6.5-15 Table 6.5 FEM-1 Bounding Spherical Particle Size - NCT Package Array................. 6.5-16 Table 6.5 FEM-1 Fissile Position Study Results - NCT Package Array ...................... 6.5-16 Table 6.6 Mass Limit Cases for FGE - HAC Package Array ........................................... 6.6-4 Table 6.6 FGE-1 Baseline Configuration - HAC Package Array..................................... 6.6-4 Table 6.6 FGE-2a Baseline Configuration - HAC Package Array ................................... 6.6-4 Table 6.6 FGE-2b Baseline Configuration - HAC Package Array................................... 6.6-5 Table 6.6 FGE-2c Baseline Configuration - HAC Package Array ................................... 6.6-5 Table 6.6 FGE-3 Baseline Configuration - HAC Package Array..................................... 6.6-5 Table 6.6 FGE-5 Baseline Configuration - HAC Package Array..................................... 6.6-6 Table 6.6 FGE Fissile Sphere Position Study Results - HAC Package Array ................. 6.6-6 Table 6.6 FGE Flooding Study Results - HAC Package Array........................................ 6.6-6 Table 6.6-9A - FGE Beryllium Moderator Study Results - HAC Package Array ................. 6.6-7 Table 6.6-9B - FGE-3 Moderator Beryllium Increase Results - HAC Package Array .......... 6.6-7 Table 6.6 FEM-1 Summary - HAC Package Array...................................................... 6.6-16 Table 6.6 FEM-1 Homogeneous Sphere Results - HAC Package Array ..................... 6.6-16 Table 6.6 FEM-1 Bounding Case for Each Cylindrical Particle Size - HAC Package Array ................................................................................................. 6.6-17 Table 6.6 FEM-1 Bounding Cylindrical Particle Size - HAC Package Array ............. 6.6-17 Table 6.6 FEM-1 Bounding Case for Each Spherical Particle Size - HAC Package Array ................................................................................................. 6.6-17 Table 6.6 FEM-1 Bounding Spherical Particle Size - HAC Package Array ................ 6.6-18 Table 6.6 FEM-1 Fissile Position Study Results - HAC Package Array ..................... 6.6-18 Table 6.6 FEM-1 Flooding Study Results - HAC Package Array................................ 6.6-18 Table 6.6-17A - FEM-1 NCT Moderator/Beryllium Check - HAC Package Array ............ 6.6-18 Table 6.8 Criticality Safety Bias and USL Functions ....................................................... 6.8-6 Table 6.8 FGE Criticality Safety USL Functions ............................................................. 6.8-6 Table 6.8 FEM Criticality Safety USL Functions ............................................................. 6.8-6 Table 6.8 Critical Benchmark Experiments - Plutonium Cases ....................................... 6.8-7 Table 6.8 Critical Benchmark Experiments - Low-Enriched Uranium Cases ................. 6.8-7 Table 6.8 Plutonium Critical Experiment Area of Applicability ...................................... 6.8-8 Table 6.8 Low-Enriched Uranium Critical Experiment Area of Applicability................. 6.8-8 Table 6.8 USL Functions for Plutonium without Beryllium Reflector Benchmarks ........ 6.8-8 Table 6.8 USL Functions for Plutonium with Beryllium Reflector Benchmarks ............. 6.8-9 Table 6.8 USL Functions for Low-Enriched Uranium Critical Benchmarks ................. 6.8-9 Table 6.8-10A - USLSTATS Input for Plutonium Critical Benchmarks ............................. 6.8-10 Table 6.8-10B - USLSTATS Input for Uranium Critical Benchmarks ................................ 6.8-13 Table 6.9.1 Summary Table of TRISO Criticality Evaluations ..................................... 6.9.1-2 Table 6.9.2 TRISO Fuel Critical Characteristics ........................................................... 6.9.2-2 Table 6.9.3 Packaging Axial Dimensions ...................................................................... 6.9.3-2 Table 6.9.3 Packaging Radial Dimensions..................................................................... 6.9.3-2 Table 6.9.3 Material Composition of Type 304 Stainless Steel ..................................... 6.9.3-7 Table 6.9.3 Material Composition of Carbon Steel ....................................................... 6.9.3-8 Table 6.9.3 Material Composition of Water and Kernel Materials ................................ 6.9.3-9 NAC International 6-vi

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Table 6.9.3 System Reactivity Variation with Fuel Material (UOC or UO2) .............. 6.9.3-14 Table 6.9.3 System Reactivity Variation with Fuel C:U and O:C Atom Ratios .......... 6.9.3-14 Table 6.9.3 System Reactivity Variation with Fuel Sphere Size/Thickness ................ 6.9.3-14 Table 6.9.3 System Reactivity Variation with Fuel Density ........................................ 6.9.3-14 Table 6.9.3 System Reactivity Variation with Matrix Density .................................. 6.9.3-15 Table 6.9.3 System Reactivity Variation with Variable Compact OD and Fixed Pitch ............................................................................................................. 6.9.3-15 Table 6.9.3 System Reactivity Variation with Variable Compact OD and Pitch (Fixed U Loading)........................................................................................ 6.9.3-15 Table 6.9.3 System Reactivity Variation for Axial Gap Between Compacts ............ 6.9.3-16 Table 6.9.3 System Reactivity Variation for Variable Number of Compacts............ 6.9.3-16 Table 6.9.3 System Reactivity Variation with Tube Gap .......................................... 6.9.3-16 Table 6.9.3 System Reactivity Variation with Toleranced Tube/Basket ................... 6.9.3-17 Table 6.9.3 Maximum Reactivity for Infinite Array and Void Exterior .................... 6.9.3-17 Table 6.9.3 Optimum Moderation Study Results....................................................... 6.9.3-17 Table 6.9.3 Basket Moderator Density Study Results ............................................... 6.9.3-18 Table 6.9.8 TRISO Criticality Safety USL Functions ................................................... 6.9.8-3 Table 6.9.8 TRISO Critical Benchmark Experiments.................................................... 6.9.8-3 Table 6.9.8 USLTATS Inpput fo rTRISO Critical Benchmarks.................................... 6.9.8-4 NAC International 6-vii

This page intentionally left blank.

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A

6.9 CRITICALITY EVALUATION

for TRISO FUEL This chapter presents the criticality evaluation demonstrating the OPTIMUS-L package complies with the requirements of 10 CFR §71.55 and §71.59 for TRISO fuel contents. The results of the criticality evaluation are summarized in Section 6.9.1.2.

NAC International 6.9-1

This page intentionally left blank.

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A 6.9.1 Description of Criticality Design 6.9.1.1 Design Features 6.9.1.2 Summary Table of Criticality Evaluation As shown in Table 6.9.1-1, keff + 2 is below the upper subcritical limit (USL) for the single package and NCT/HAC package array evaluations.

6.9.1.3 Criticality Safety Index An infinite subcritical array is analyzed for both NCT and HAC. Therefore, the CSI is 0.0 per 10 CFR 71.59.

NAC International 6.9.1-1

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Table 6.9.1-1 Summary Table of TRISO Criticality Evaluations NAC International 6.9.1-2

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A 6.9.2 Package Contents NAC International 6.9.2-1

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Table 6.9.2-1 TRISO Fuel Critical Characteristics NAC International 6.9.2-2

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A 6.9.3 General Considerations 6.9.3.1 Model Configuration NAC International 6.9.3-1

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Table 6.9.3-1 Packaging Axial Dimensions Table 6.9.3-2 Packaging Radial Dimensions NAC International 6.9.3-2

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A 6.9.3.2 Material Properties NAC International 6.9.3-6

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Table 6.9.3-3 Material Composition of Type 304 Stainless Steel NAC International 6.9.3-7

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Table 6.9.3-4 Material Composition of Carbon Steel NAC International 6.9.3-8

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Table 6.9.3-5 Material Composition of Water and Kernel Materials NAC International 6.9.3-9

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A 6.9.3.3 Computer Codes and Cross-Section Libraries NAC International 6.9.3-10

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A NAC International 6.9.3-11

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A NAC International 6.9.3-12

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A NAC International 6.9.3-13

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Table 6.9.3-6 System Reactivity Variation with Fuel Material (UOC or UO2)

Table 6.9.3-7 System Reactivity Variation with Fuel C:U and O:C Atom Ratios Table 6.9.3-8 System Reactivity Variation with Fuel Sphere Size/Thickness Table 6.9.3-9 System Reactivity Variation with Fuel Density NAC International 6.9.3-14

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Table 6.9.3-10 System Reactivity Variation with Matrix Density Table 6.9.3-11 System Reactivity Variation with Variable Compact OD and Fixed Pitch Table 6.9.3-12 System Reactivity Variation with Variable Compact OD and Pitch (Fixed U Loading)

NAC International 6.9.3-15

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Table 6.9.3-13 System Reactivity Variation for Axial Gap Between Compacts Table 6.9.3-14 System Reactivity Variation for Variable Number of Compacts Table 6.9.3-15 System Reactivity Variation with Tube Gap NAC International 6.9.3-16

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Table 6.9.3-16 System Reactivity Variation with Toleranced Tube/Basket Table 6.9.3-17 Maximum Reactivity for Infinite Array and Void Exterior Table 6.9.3-18 Optimum Moderation Study Results NAC International 6.9.3-17

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Table 6.9.3-19 Basket Moderator Density Study Results NAC International 6.9.3-18

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A NAC International 6.9.3-19

This page intentionally left blank.

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A 6.9.4 Single Package Evaluation NAC International 6.9.4-1

This page intentionally left blank.

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A 6.9.5 Evaluation of Package Arrays Under Normal Conditions of Transport NAC International 6.9.5-1

This page intentionally left blank.

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A 6.9.6 Package Arrays Under Hypothetical Accident Conditions NAC International 6.9.6-1

This page intentionally left blank.

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A 6.9.7 Fissile Material Packages for Air Transport The package is not presently authorized for air transport.

NAC International 6.9.7-1

This page intentionally left blank.

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A 6.9.8 Benchmark Evaluation NAC International 6.9.8-1

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A NAC International 6.9.8-2

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Table 6.9.8-1 TRISO Criticality Safety USL Functions Table 6.9.8-2 TRISO Critical Benchmark Experiments NAC International 6.9.8-3

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Table 6.9.8-3 USLSTATS Input for TRISO Critical Benchmarks NAC International 6.9.8-4

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Table 6.9.8-3 USLSTATS Input for TRISO Critical Benchmarks NAC International 6.9.8-5

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A eff NAC International 6.9.8-6

NAC PROPRIETARY INFORMATION REMOVED OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Figure 6.9.8-2 keff vs. EALF - TRISO Benchmark NAC International 6.9.8-7

This page intentionally left blank.

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A 6.10 Appendix 6.10.1 References

[6.1] Washington TRU Solutions LLC, Test Plan to determine the TRU Waste Polyethylene Packing Fraction, WP 08-PT.09, Rev. 0, 2003.

[6.2] SAIC, Reactivity Effects of Moderator and Reflector Materials on a Finite Plutonium System, SAIC-1322-001 Rev. 1, 2004.

[6.3] ASTM International, Specification for General Requirements for Steel Plates for Pressures Vessels, SA-20/SA-20M, 2007.

[6.4] Los Alamos National Laboratory, Listing of Available ACE Data Tables, LA-UR 21822 Rev. 4, 2014.

[6.5] Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Compendium of Material Composition Data for Radiation Transport Modeling, PNNL-15870 Rev. 1, 2011.

[6.6] American Institute of Physics, Isotopic Compositions of the Elements, 2001, 2005.

[6.7] Atomic Mass Data Center, The Ame2003 Atomic Mass Evaluation, Nuclear Physics A 729 (2003) 336-676, December 22, 2003.

[6.8] Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Scale: A Comprehensive Modeling and Simulation Suite for Nuclear Safety Analysis and Design, ORNL/TM-2005/39 Version 6.1, 2011.

[6.9] Los Alamos National Laboratory, Initial MCNP 6 Release Overview - MCNP6 Version 1.0, LA-UR-13-22934, 2013.

[6.10] American Nuclear Society, Nuclear Criticality Safety in Operations with Fissionable Materials Outside Reactors, ANSI/ANS-8.1-2014, 2014.

[6.11] [RESERVED]

[6.12] American Nuclear Society, Nuclear Criticality Safety Control of Special Actinide Nuclides, ANSI/ANS-8.15-2014, 2014.

[6.13] U.S. Department of Energy, Transuranic Waste Acceptance Criteria for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, DOE/WIPP-02-3122 Rev. 8, 2016

[6.14] Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development - Nuclear Energy Agency, International Handbook of Evaluated Criticality Safety Benchmark Experiments, NEA/NSC/DOC(95)03, 2014.

NAC International 6.10-1

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A

[6.15] Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Criticality Benchmark Guide for Light-Water-Reactor Fuel in Transportation and Storage Packages, NUREG/CR-6361, ORNL/TM-13211, NUREG/CR-6361, ORNL/TM-13211, 1997.

[6.16] Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Compendium of Material Composition Data for Radiation Transport Modeling, PNNL-15870 Rev. 2, 2021.

[6.17] Los Alamos National Laboratory, MCNP Users Manual, Code Version 6.2, LA-UR-17-29981, 2017.

[6.18] Los Alamos National Laboratory, Guide for Using ENDF/B-VIII.0 Nuclear Data with MCNP, LA-UR-20-30460, 2020.

[6.19] Los Alamos National Laboratory, Release of Continuous Representation for S(,) ACE Data, LA-UR-14-21878, 2014.

[6.20] Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development - Nuclear Energy Agency, International Handbook of Evaluated Criticality Safety Benchmark Experiments, NEA/NSC/DOC(95)03, 2020.

[6.21] Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development - Nuclear Energy Agency, International Handbook of Evaluated Reactor Physics Benchmark Experiments, NEA/NSC/DOC(2006)1, 2020.

NAC International 6.10-2

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Chapter 7 Package Operations Table of Contents 7 PACKAGE OPERATIONS ............................................................................................. 7-1 7.1 Package Loading ........................................................................................................... 7.1-1 7.1.1 Preparation for Loading .................................................................................... 7.1-1 7.1.2 Loading of Contents.......................................................................................... 7.1-3 7.1.3 Preparation for Transport .................................................................................. 7.1-4 7.2 Package Unloading ....................................................................................................... 7.2-1 7.2.1 Receipt of Package from Carrier....................................................................... 7.2-1 7.2.2 Removal of Contents......................................................................................... 7.2-1 7.3 Preparation of Empty Packaging for Transport ............................................................ 7.3-1 7.4 Other Operations ........................................................................................................... 7.4-1 7.5 Appendix ....................................................................................................................... 7.5-1 7.5.1 References ......................................................................................................... 7.5-1 Attachment 7.5 Demonstration of Compliance with Dose Rate Limits .................. 7.5-2 Attachment 7.5 Example CCV Pre-Shipment Inerting Procedure ........................ 7.5-18 Attachment 7.5 Procedure for Determination of Flammable Gas Concentration and Shipping Time ...................................................................... 7.5-21 List of Figures Figure 7.5-1 Pre-Shipment Inerting Apparatus Schematic .................................................. 7.5-20 Figure 7.5-2 CCV Contents/Gas Temperature vs. Decay Heat ........................................... 7.5-24 List of Tables Table 7-1 FGE Conversion Factors ...................................................................................... 7-3 Table 7.5-1 Bare Cask Dose Rate/Ci Values ....................................................................... 7.5-3 Table 7.5-2 OPTIMUS-L SIA Configuration Dose Rate/Ci Results ................................... 7.5-9 Table 7.5-3 CCV Free Volume and Fill Gas Temperatures ............................................... 7.5-24 NAC International 7-i

This page intentionally left blank.

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A 7 PACKAGE OPERATIONS This chapter outlines the operations used to load the OPTIMUS-L transportation package and prepare it for transport (Section 7.1), unload the package (Section 7.2), and prepare the empty package for transport (Section 7.3). It presents the fundamental operating steps in the order in which they are performed. The operating steps are intended to ensure that the package is properly prepared for transport, consistent with the package evaluation in Chapters 2 through 6, and to ensure that occupational exposure rates are as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA).

The package shall be operated in accordance with detailed written procedures that are based on, and consistent with, the operations described in this section. To provide a comprehensive description of the package operations, this chapter describes a sequence for steps and refers to specific facility areas. The specific sequence and locations in the detailed written operating procedures may be tailored to meet facility requirements. Furthermore, the operating procedures in this section use standard rigging (e.g., swivel hoist rings and 3-leg bridles) to lift the packaging components. The use of alternative lifting devices in detailed written procedures is also acceptable, provided they satisfy the applicable site requirements.

It is the responsibility of the user of the packaging to prepare detailed operating procedures based on the operating procedures described in this chapter, the requirements of the Certificate of Compliance, and any applicable site requirements. In addition, each licensee is responsible for providing advance notification in accordance with 10 CFR 71.97(b) for Type B shipments of quantities of normal form radioactive material being transported across a State boundary enroute to a disposal facility or to a collection point for transport to a disposal facility exceeding 3000 A2.

All contents to be shipped shall satisfy the requirements for type and form of material, maximum quantity of contents per package, and loading restrictions described in Section 1.2.2. For TRU waste, compliance with dose rate limits shall be demonstrated in accordance with Attachment 7.5-1. Furthermore, the total radioactive decay heat of the contents shall not exceed 100 watts, and any content with a total radioactive decay heat exceeding 50 watts shall be inerted in accordance with Attachment 7.5-2.

For TRU waste contents that could radiolytically generate combustible gases (Content 1-1), the criteria of Sections 4.5.2 and 4.5.3 must be addressed. For TRU waste, compliance with the flammable gas concentration limits shall be demonstrated in accordance with Attachment 7.5-3, using the methods discussed in Appendix 4.5.4.

For converting isotopes to a Fissile Gram Equivalent (FGE) 239Pu, the conversion factors presented in Table 7-1 shall be used. Note that only the isotopes listed in Table 7-1 need to be NAC International 7-1

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR November 2021 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 0 considered for the total FGE mass determination. The total FGE mass of the contents is calculated as the sum of the isotope mass times the respective FGE conversion factor for each isotope listed in Table 7-1. The calculated total FGE mass must be less than the respective limit (e.g. 250 g239Pu for FGE-5) to be acceptable for shipment in the OPTIMUS-L.

NAC International 7-2

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR November 2020 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 0 7.5 Appendix 7.5.1 References

[7.1] ANSI N14.5-2014, American National Standard for Radioactive Materials - Leakage Tests on Packages for Shipment, American National Standards Institute, Inc., June 19, 2014.

[7.2] Savannah River National Laboratory, Report No. SRNL-STI-2016-00674, Proof of Principle Testing For Inerting a 9978 Containment Vessel, November 2016.

[7.3] American Nuclear Society, Nuclear Criticality Safety in Operations with Fissionable Materials Outside Reactors, ANSI/ANS-8.1-2014, 2014.

[7.4] American Nuclear Society, Nuclear Criticality Safety Control of Special Actinide Nuclides, ANSI/ANS-8.15-2014, 2014.

NAC International 7.5-1

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Attachment 7.5-1 Demonstration of Compliance with Dose Rate Limits for TRU Waste (see Section 5.4.4.3 for the discussion on demonstrating compliance with dose rate limits)

1. Determine the total activity of each isotope in the contents.

2. Demonstrate compliance with 10CFR71 dose rate limits in accordance with Section 5.4.4.3, as follows:

a. Calculate the dose rate for each isotope in the contents (including all decay products) at the package surface, 2-meter, and HAC 1-meter based on the activity of each isotope in the contents and the Dose Rate/Ci values listed in Table 7.5-1 (for a package with no SIA that is not secured to the center of the trailer) or Table 7.5-2 (for a package secured to the center of the trailer with no SIA, a 1-inch SIA, or a 21/4-inch SIA.)1 Calculate the total dose rates at the package surface, 2-meter, and HAC 1-meter as the sum of the dose rates for each isotope at the respective location using Equation 4 from Section 5.4.4.3.

b. If the calculated dose rates are less than the respective limits for the package surface, 2-meter, and HAC 1-meter locations (i.e., conservatively taken as 90% of the regulatory dose rate limits, or 180 mrem/hr, 9 mrem/hr, and 900 mrem/hr, respectively), compliance with external dose rate limits has been demonstrated and the package analyzed can be shipped in the analyzed configuration. If the total dose rates exceed any of the respective limits then repeat Steps 2a, and 2b for the shipping configuration that includes the appropriate SIA.

Note: if any dose rate value is rounded, it should always be rounded up to ensure that the calculated dose rates never exceed their respective limits due to rounding.

c. For a centered package, if the total dose rate at the package surface and 2-meter location are less than 50% of the regulatory limit, the package centerline may be secured as close as 15 feet from the driver cab. Otherwise, the centerline of the package must be secured at least 20 feet from the driver cab.

1 The Dose Rate/Ci values for any isotopes not listed in Table 7.5-1 and 7.5-2 may be calculated in accordance with Section 5.4.4.2.

NAC International 7.5-2

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Attachment 7.5-3 Procedure for Determination of Flammable Gas Concentration and Shipping Time The procedure for package users to determine the flammable gas concentration in any containment volume of authorized TRU waste contents using the method discussed in Section 4.5.4 is outlined below. Example hydrogen gas accumulation calculations using this procedure for hypothetical contents are provided in Section 4.5.4.4.

Determination of waste forms/quantities may be made by the user based on process/historical knowledge, measurement/sampling, radiography, or visual inspection. Certain parameters necessary for the hydrogen gas accumulation calculations are dependent on the packaging configuration (i.e., free volume inside the CCV cavity) and the decay heat of the contents.

Flammable gas concentration calculations may be performed using the CCV free volume for the specific packaging configuration and the bounding NCT temperature based on the packaging decay heat of the contents.

The free volume within the CCV cavity for the three packaging configurations shown on Drawing 70000.14-L502 in Section 1.3.3, accounting for internal support structures (e.g., SIA and/or CCV bottom support plate) but excluding the waste contents in secondary containers, and the applicable bounding NCT cavity gas temperatures are shown in Table 7.5-3. These CCV free volumes are calculated by subtracting the displaced volume of the internal support structures (e.g., an SIA) from the nominal free volume of the CCV cavity (639 L). As noted in Table 7.5-3, these free volumes do not account for the displaced volume of any user-supplied dunnage/shoring or the waste contents (including secondary containers), which must be accounted for separately.

The average temperature of the contents and fill gas inside the CCV as a function of the total decay heat load of the contents and the type of fill gas used (i.e., air or helium) is determined as described in Appendix 3.5.2.4 and shown in Figure 7.5-2. When performing flammable gas concentration and shipping time calculations, the average gas temperature may be determined using Figure 7.5-2 based on the known total heat load of the contents.

The procedural steps for the user to determine the flammable gas concentration in any containment volume of authorized contents and the resulting permissible transport time (i.e.,

shipping window) are as follows:

NAC International 7.5-21

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A

1. Determine the volumes of the outermost and innermost confinement regions.2 Any uncertainty in a regions volume shall be treated in a conservative manner, i.e., always assume the minimum available volume based on content data.

a. The outermost region is always the CCV cavity, the volume of which is reduced by the space taken up by any internal support structures (e.g., SIA, CCV bottom support plate, and/or shoring/dunnage) and the volume of the secondary container. The starting volume for the given configuration is provided in Table 7.5-3, which lists the volume of the CCV cavity minus the space taken up by the internal support structures included in the respective configuration. This volume shall be reduced by the total displaced volume (i.e, external volume) of the contents secondary container (e.g. liner, 55-gallon drum, etc.) and any additional shoring between the CCV and the secondary container that is not shown on the general arrangement drawings, as applicable.

b. The innermost region, if applicable, could be the secondary container in the form of a 55-gallon (208 L) drum, 110-gallon (418 L) drum, or other secondary container(s). The innermost containment volume could also be the innermost nested volume inside the secondary container (e.g., vented cans or bags). The volume inside the innermost region that is taken up by its contents must be accounted for (i.e., only free volume should be considered).

2. Determine bounding G-values of contents (See Section 4.5.4.1). The maximum G-value of all hydrogenous materials in the contents should be selected to ensure a bounding calculation.

a. Account for content radiation type (Optional). The proportions of the and vs.

radiation of the contents may be used to determine a lower dose-dependent G-value, if the contents meet the 0.012 watt-year absorbed dose criteria.

b. Account for content temperature (Required). The G-value must be adjusted based on the difference between the source data temperature (typically room temperature) and the bounding NCT temperature of each cavity gas (i.e., whether the cavity is filled with helium or air). The temperature of the cavity gas and contents is determined as a function of the fill gas and total decay heat load based on Figure 7.5-2.

2 For the hydrogen gas calculation method, only the innermost and outermost volumes are considered. Any intermediate volumes are neglected and only the reduction in release rate from the additional boundaries is considered. For example, for a 55-gallon drum nested within a 110-gallon drum, the volume between the two drums is not considered, only the combined resistance to gas flow through the two filters on the drums.

NAC International 7.5-22

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A

c. Calculate the Flammable Gas Generation Rate (FGGR) based on the temperature-adjusted G-value and content decay heat.

3. Determine release rates for each confinement region (See Section 4.5.4.2). Each confinement region (except the CCV) must have some venting mechanism (e.g., a filter) to allow the flow of gas out of the volume container. The release rate (RR) of each venting mechanism shall be determined based on either available product data, published industry accepted data, or test data.

a. Account for content temperature (Required). The release rate (RRi) of each confinement region should be temperature-adjusted based on the difference between the temperature of the source data (room temperature if not otherwise stated) and the content temperature.

b. Determine the effective release rate (Teff). For one boundary, Teff is equal to the release rate (RR) of the vent on the secondary container. If there are nested containers (e.g. a sealed bag inside of a 55-gallon drum) Teff is the effective resistance of the combined release rates of the individual layers calculated in accordance with Section 4.5.4.2.

4. Determine permissible transport time (See Section 4.5.4.3). Using the equation provided, determine the time, t, that it would take to reach a hydrogen volume fraction, Xi(t), equal to the set limit for the given contents. If this time is less than 1 year, the permissible transport time is set as 1/2 of the determined time, t. For most contents, two separate cases must be considered to account for the competing effects of flammable gas generation rate and release rate at the maximum and minimum temperatures; the maximum temperature of the contents for NCT heat (from Figure 7.5-2) and the minimum temperature of the contents for NCT cold (i.e., -40°C). Typically, the hot case produces shorter transport times because the temperature increase effect on flammable gas generation rate is greater than the temperature decrease effect on the release rate. However, this is not the case for a content material like water, for which the flammable gas generation rate is not temperature dependent (see NUREG/CR-6673, Section 2.4.2). In this case, the cold case will always be bounding because temperature only affects the release rate.

NAC International 7.5-23

OPTIMUS-L Package SAR October 2022 Docket No. 71-9390 Revision 22A Table 7.5 CCV Free Volume and Fill Gas Temperatures Upper Bound NCT Fill Gas CCV Free Configuration Internal Support Temperatures (°C)(3)

Volume(2)

(Assembly #)(1) Structure Volume Air Fill He Fill (L)

(L) ( 50W) ( 100W)

Bare Cask (Assy -99) 21 618 1-inch SIA (Assy -98) 85 554 Figure 7.5-2(4) Figure 7.5-2(4) 21/4-inch SIA (Assy -97) 164 475 Notes:

1.

Assembly configurations shown in general arrangement drawing 70000.14-L502 in Section 1.3.3.

The bare cask (Assy. -99) configuration includes the CCV bottom support plate, the 1-inch SIA (Assy. -98) configuration includes the 1-inch SIA assembly only (i.e., it does not include the CCV bottom support plate), and the 21/4-inch SIA (Assy. -97) configuration includes the 21/4-inch SIA assembly (including the annular spacer attached to its bottom end but excluding the SIA lid) and the CCV bottom support plate.

2.

Calculated based on the empty CCV volume (639 L) minus the volume of the included waste contents and secondary container (e.g., drum).

3.

Upper bound fill gas temperatures for the 50W, Air Fill Gas and 100W, Helium Fill Gas conditions are from Table 3.3-2. Upper bound fill gas temperatures for lower heat loads are determined using the same thermal model with reduced content heat load.

4.

The temperature (°C) of contents/fill gas with air or helium fill gas for a decay heat load, x (watts) is determined in accordance with Figure 7.5-2.

Figure 7.5 CCV Contents/Gas Temperature vs. Decay Heat NAC International 7.5-24