NUREG/CR-4829, Forwards NUREG/CR-4829, Shipping Container Response to Severe Highway & Railway Accident Conditions & Response to Peer Review Comments.W/O Encl
| ML20205K179 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 02/10/1987 |
| From: | Lahs W NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REGULATORY RESEARCH (RES) |
| To: | Plooster M DENVER, UNIV. OF, DENVER, CO |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20205K177 | List:
|
| References | |
| FOIA-88-378, RTR-NUREG-CR-4829 NUDOCS 8811010016 | |
| Download: ML20205K179 (2) | |
Text
-.
,js* Hcg'o, UNIT ED sT ATEs 8, *,
e NUCLE AR REGULATORY COMMISSION t w AssiNotoN. o. c. rosss
{ ,I k..l...f FER I O Mi1 Mr. Myron Plooster Denver Research Institute Laboratories for Applied Mechanics Division University of Denver P.O. Box 10127 Denver Colorado 80210
Dear Mr. Plooster:
l Attached you will find a pre-print copy of the long-anticipated Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) report. "Shipping Container Response to Severe Highway and Railway Accident Conditions." NUREG/CR-4829. Also attached are LLNL's responses to the peer review coments--a response which we discussed back in November.
1 have reviewed this final report and believe it is a significant improverrent l! from the "review" version. Your coments and detailed suggestions were I instrumental to this upgrade. You'll note that LLNL was able to reorganize the sections--the probability analysis precedes the screening analysis sections and the section relating potential radiological hazards to damage now follows the screening analysis. The subject--especially the approach taken to reach NRC's j
' objective--is complex and, although I am sure further improvements could be made. I am now comfortable with this report, i With regard to schedule slippages. LLNL is not alone. The NRC authored sumary l
brochure has been delayed in our publications organization because of higher j priority Comission work. I had planned to send you the brochure with the LLNL
! report so that you could view the research program's results in their entirety.
j Instead. I will have to followup this tratismittal with the brochure, hopefully, by the end of this month, t Your review of this final LLNL report will conclude your peer review efforts.
If warranted, a short letter sumarizing your views on both the report and the
[
responses to the peer-review coments would be appreciated. Certainly. I would appreciate being made aware of any criticism you may have on this final report.
f'e
.,;) /pu . un,k,m ' Q William R. Lahs Risk Analysis Branch
- Division of Reactor hystem Safety Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research l 1
Attachment:
1 J As stated t
i 1
8811010016 FOIA 001003 ppg PDR l AVDtNOB-370
e
[ /g&* **Qu ,'o,, UNITED STATES
! l ' ',, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 4 WASHtNGTON.O. C 2%$$
l 5 :
'S, . . . . . ,d Mr. Myron Plooster Denver Research Institute University of Denver P. O. Box 10127 Denver, CO 80210
Dear Mr loNter:
At long last, the brochure supporting the Moda) Study has been printed and is being distributed. I have enclosed two copies for your perusal. If you have any coriments on the brochure. I would be pleased to hear from you. My telephonenumberis(301)443-7632.
Sincerely,
.R M William R. Lahs 2