ML20206A839
| ML20206A839 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 04/03/1987 |
| From: | Rouse L NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| To: | Barnhart V GENERAL NUCLEAR SYSTEMS, INC. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20206A843 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-PROJ-M-37 NUDOCS 8704080194 | |
| Download: ML20206A839 (6) | |
Text
~
~
g
- ' ~
- s
&?$154:zl@M,9&
r
_ FCilf _
[
,j APR OS W fCAF I!!6 bW #
eProject M-37' E'U b #
CD Other General Nuclear Systems, Inc.
FM _ _ W4) i,_ _
d 1:, N --
U ATTN:. Mr. Victor J. Barnhart i
President' b8IUIIIi0 u
2 10 a"
SS 396 t
Dear Mr. Barnhart:
In Septemberc 1985,'the ' Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff completed its review!of Revision 11 of the General: Nuclear Systems, Inc., " Topical Safety 4
r Analysis Report for the CASTOR V/21 Cask Independent Spent Fuel Storage I.
. Installation -(Dry Storage)" (TSAR).. Based on this review,~ NRC staff concluded
~
lthat the CASTOR V/21 cask design as described in the TSAR provides for an Q
Cacceptable means to meet the requirements of 10.CFR.Part 72, as defined in our letter to you of September 30, 1985,'and subject to appropriate specifications sexpressed in the: enclosures of that letter, (Enclosure 1, Limitations and
- 0perating' Conditions,.and Enclosure 2, the NRC staff's Safety Evaluation d
1
- t '
Report). This acce'ptability was limited to conditions and the spent fuel detailed in the TSAR (i.e., Revision 1), augmented by information submitted.
E
- after the. filing of Revision.I and September 30, 1985, letter with its enclosures.
Subsequently, NRC staff was ~ officially infomed by a General Nuclear Systems, Inc.',(GNSI).letterdatedOctober 10, 1985, of an occurrence involving detection of weld area cracks in the borated' stainless. steel fuel' basket of the CASTOR V/21 cask being used in an unlicensed Department of Energy research' f
and development storage demonstration at the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory. J 0ur letter to you, dated October 14, 1985, requested from GNSI'and analysis and evaluation of the cause(s) of the basket cracks and an assessment of the need for design changes.
As an intermediate. measure GNSI submitted an alternative design, by letter
' dated February 28, 1986, for a cask fuel basket which does not employ borated
-stainless steel as a basket material. After modification this design was approved for use'in the CASTOR V/21 by our letter to GNSI dated April 30, 1986..
Concurrently, since October 1985, we have received information and analyses from GNSI regarding the reported basket cracks and data and information characterizing the borated stainless steel Radionox A 18 with nominal 1.03 weight percent boron to be used in the revised basket design submitted in GNSI letter of September 30, 1986. GNSI has carried out an engineering evaluation and testing program to validate the use of borated stainless steel in its basket design for the CASTOR V/21. By letter dated February 5, 1987, GNSI 8704000194 870403 PDR PROJ M-37 PDR
p.
'D APR 03 W
- General-Nuclear Systems, Inc..
2 submitted its-results in a report entitled, " CASTOR V/21 Borated Stainless
-Steel Basket Evaluation.-January 1987," which included a material evaluation report for the material Radionox A 18, a revision for the CASTOR V/21' topical report, and an evaluation of the basket weld area crack incident at Idaho-National Engineering Laboratory (INEL)..
' As part of our. safety evaluation we have reviewed this submittal (see enclosure), and we conclude that the INEL incident has been satisfactorily explained and that the steps taken in the design and. fabrication of the revised fuel. basket using Radionox A 18 to prevent a recurrence are adequate.
.We further conclude that-the Radionox A 18 with nominal 1.03 weight percent.
boron has been adequately characterized and that it may safely be used in the revised fuel basket design. Finally, we find that the revised basket design, which incorporates Radionox A 18, meets the structural requirements for normal,
' off-nomal and accident conditions as required under 10 CF; 3 action 72.72. We further conclude, based on our previous analyses, that this borated stainless steel. basket design meets the criticality requirements of 10 CFR'Section 72.73 and other applicable requirements of Subpart F of 10 CFR Part 72 when used in the CASTOR V/21 cask for spent fuel subject to the limitations of enclosure 1 to our letter of approval of September 30, 1985.
In particular, the initial enrichment of the spent fuel is not to exceed 3.5 weight percent U-235.
Based on the staff's previous review and analyses, as documented in tb September 30, 1985, letter of approval with enclosed Safety Evaluation Report.
' and the staff's supplemental review and analyses as documented in our April 30, 1986, letter of approval for an all stainless steel basket, the staff concludes that, with the revisions stated in the GNSI letter dated February 7, 1987, the berated stainless steel basket design submitted by GNSI in its September 30, 1986, letter meets the requirements of 10 CFR Part 72.
Further, with this basket design the CASTOR V/21 nodular cast iron cask design, as documented in the TSAR and approved in our letter of September 30, 1985, acceptably meets the requirements of 10 CFR Part 72, provided that initial fuel enrichment is restricted to < 3.5 weight percent U-235 for spent fuel to be stored (n the cask.
It is requested that General Nuclear Systems, Inc. publish an approved version of this report, with proprietary information in a separate binder, ~as per Item 3,
" Proprietary Information," of the Introduction to Regulatory Guide 3.48, and submit 10 copies for docketing within 90 days of the receipt of this letter.
In the approved version, there are items relating to the CASTOR V/21 Topical Safety Analysis Report, Revision 1, which need to be clarified or corrected i
(see our September 30, 1985, letter to you, enclosure 3, TSAR Corrections, our
-April 30, 1986, letter to you and the enclosure of this letter). Also, an analysis for cask end on drop with impact limiter was perfomed by the staff and the cask design was found acceptable (See Enclosure 2, Safety Evaluation Report, page 21, of our September 30, 1985, letter to GNSI), but no such analysis has been included by GNSI in the TSAR.
For completeness, it should be provided. While these items do not affect our assessment of safety and compliance with the requirements of 10 CFR Part 72 as reflected by our safety evaluations, they should be incorporated in the TSAR.
m w -.(
APR 03 W General' Nuclear Systems,;Inc.
3 This revision.is also 'to incorporate this letter and the April. 30,1986, and September 30,1985, letters of approval, following the title page.
It should also include a listing ~ identifying with submittal dates supporting supplemental infoimation submitted after the TSAR, i.e.,_ Revision-1 and docketed under.
Project M-37.--The report identification of the approved report is to have an "A" suffix.
4 The' NRC staff does iiot' intend to repeat the review of the features important
.,to safety described in the TSAR and found acceptable, when it appears as a reference-in a license'applicatien except to assure that the material presented'is applicable to the application involved._ The NRC staff's acceptance applies only to the features described in the TSAR, as augmented b
l information submitted subsequent to the filing of the TSAR
.(y the supplementai.e., Revision.1).
Should NRC criteria or regulations change, such that our conclusions as to the acceptability of the report are invalidated, General Nuclear Systems Inc.,
i and/or the applicants referencing the Topical Report will be expected to revise and resubmit their respective documentation, or submit justification for the continued effective applicability of the Topical Report without revision of their respective documentation.
Sincerely, L
original stated 15 Leland C, Rouse Leland C. Rouse, Chief Advanced Fuel and Spent Fuel Licensing Branch Division of Fuel Cycle and Material Safety
Enclosure:
- Review of CASTOR V/21 Borated Stainless Steel Basket Evaluation
_ DISTRIBUTION: Please return original c
concurrence copy to FBrown SS 396
~PDR & LPDR S V/f~~~)
" '9637 WBrown
-Docket 72-2 OSmith (50-260/261)
-FCAF r/f JKennedy bec: MSchwartz, LLNL LCRouse JGray MSmith, VEPC0 JPRoberts CPatel WHolland, RI FSturz FBrown GJohnson
'NDavison CEMacDonald JSchneider' DWeiss
/
OFC: FC4
- FCAF/1 :
_ _ _ _. (. s........f'4.............___________.___..__......______...__
NAME:JPF#
rts/jl:LCRouse :
.....__f._.___.....__......_._____...__.._.._.._.......____..............
DATEi 4/3 /87
- i/3 /87:
0FFICIAL RECORD COPY
l 1
/
UNITED STATES
- NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g
. r.
wasmucrom.ci.c aosss
/
~
%eow
'APR 03 W Project M-37 General Nuclear Systems. Inc.
ATTN: Mr. Victor J. Barnhart President 220 Stoneridge Dr.
Columbia, SC 29210
Dear Mr. Barnhart:
In September 1985, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff completed its t.
review of Revision 1 of the General Nuclear Systems, Inc., " Topical Safety
- Analysis Report for the CASTOR V/21 Cask Independent Spent Fuel StorageBased o Installation (DryStorage)"(TSAR).
~
that the CASTOR V/21 cask design as described in the TSAR provides for an acceptable means to meet the requirements of 10 CFR Part 72, as defined in our letter to you of September 30, 1985, and subject to appropriate specifications hf expressed in the enclosures of that letter, (Enclosure 1, Limitations and Operating Conditions, and Enclosure 2, the NRC staff's Safety Evaluation i
Report). This acceptability was limited to conditions and the spent fuel d2 tailed in the TSAR (i.e., Revision 1), augmented by information submitted after the filing of Revision 1 and September 30, 1985, letter with its onclosures.
Subsequently, NRC staff was officially informed by a General Nuclear Systems, 10, 1985, of an occurrence involving
-Inc., (GNSI) letter dated October datection of weld area cracks in the borated stainless steel fuel basket of the CASTOR V/21 cask being used in an unlicensed Departme'nt of Energy research i
and development storage demonstration at the Idaho National Engineeringrequested Laboratory. Our letter to you, dated October 14, 1985, analysis and evaluation of the cause(s) of the basket cracks and an assessment cf the need for design changes.
As an Intermediate measure GNSI submitted an alternative design, by letter 28,1936,'for a cask fuel basket which does not employ borated dated February After modification this design was stainless steel as a basket material.
approved for use in the CASTOR V/21 by our letter to GNSI dated April 30, 1986.
Concurrently, since October 1985, we have received information and analyses fmm GNSI regarding the reported basket cracks and data and information characterizing the borated stainless steel Radionox A'18 with nominal 1.03 weight percent boron to be used in the revised basket. design submitted 1FGNSI 1stter of September 30, 1986. GNSI has carried out an engineering evaluation and testing program to validate the use of borated stainless steel in its basket design for the CASTOR V/21. By letter dated February 5,1987, GNSI
APR 03 337 General Nuclear Systems, Inc.
2 submitted its results in a report entitled, " CASTOR V/21 Borated Stainless Steel Basket Evaluation January 1987," which included a material. evaluation' report for the material Radionox A 18, a revision for the CASTOR V/21 topical 1
report, and an evaluation of the basket weld area crack incident at Idaho National Engineering Laboratory (INEL).
As part of our safety evaluation we have reviewed this submittal (see enclosure), and we conclude that the INEL incident has been satisfactorily cxplained and that the steps taken in the design and fabrication of the revised fuel basket using Radionox A 18 to prevent a recurrence are adequate.
We further conclude that the Radionox A 18 with nominal 1.03 weight percent b:ron has been adequately characterized and that it may safely be used in the revised fuel basket design. Finally, we-find that the revised basket design, which incorporates Radionox A 18, meets the structural requirements for noma 1, j
We cff-nomal and accident conditions as required under 10 CFR Section 72.72.
l further conclude, based on our previous analyses, that this horated stainless steel basket design meets the criticality requirements..of 10 CFR Section 72.73 and other applicable requirements of Subpart F of 10 CFR Part 77 when used in the CASTOR V/21 cask for spent fuel subject to the limitations of enclosure 1 to our letter of approval of Seatember 30, 1985.
In particular, the initial l-enrichment of the spent fuel is not to exceed 3.5 weight percent U-235.
Based on the staff's previous review and analyses, as documented in the 30, 1985, letter of approval with enclosed Safety Evaluation Report, September and the staff's supplemental review and analyses as documented in our April 30, 1986, letter of approval for an all stainless steel basket, the staff concludes that, with the revisions stated in the GNSI letter dated February 7,1987, the borated stainless steel basket design submitted by GNSI in its September 30, 1986, letter meets the requirements of 10 CFR Part 72. Further, with this basket design the CASTOR V/21 nodular cast iron cask design, as documented in the TSAR and approved in our letter of September 30,198,5, acceptably meets the requirements of 10 CFR Part 72, provided that initial fuel enrichment is restricted to < 3.5 weight percent U-235 for spent fuel to be stored in the cask.
It is requested that General Nuclear Systems, Inc. publish an approved version of this report, with proprietary infomation in a separate binder, as per Item 3
" Proprietary Information," of the Introduction to Regulatory Guide 3.48, and submit 10 copies for docketing within 90 days of the receipt of this letter.
In the approved version, there are items relating to the CASTOR V/21 Topical Safety Analysis Report, Revision 1, which need to be clarified or corrected 30, 1985, letter to you, enclosure 3, TSAR Corrections, our (see our September letter to you and the enclosure of this letter). Also, an April 30, 1986, analysis for cask end on drop with im>act limiter was perfomed by the staff and the cask design was found accepta >1e (See Enclosure 2 Safety Evaluation Report, page 21, of our September 30, 1985, letter to.4NSI), but no such ^
For completeness, it should analysis has been included by GNSI in the TSAR.While these items do not affect be provided.
compliance with the requirements of 10 CFR Part 77 as reflected by our safety evaluations, they should be incorporated in the TSAR.
i
~ - -.. -
APR 0 31987 General Nuclear Systems, Inc.
-.3 This revision is also to incorporate this letter and the April 30, 1986, and September 30, 1985, letters of approval, following the title page.
It should also include a listing identifying with submittal dates supporting supplemental infonnation submitted after the TSAR, i.e., Revision 1 and docketed under Project M-37. The report identification of the approved report is to have.an "A" suffix.
The NRC staff does not intend to repeat the review of the features important to safety described in the TSAR and found acceptable, when it appears as a rcference in a license application except to assure that the material presented is applicable to the application involved. The NRC staff's acceptance applies only to the features described in the TSAR, as augmented by the supplemental infonnation submitted subsequent to the filing of the TSAR (i.e., Revision 1).
Should NRC criteria or regulations change, such that our conclusions as to the acceptability of the report are invalidated, General Nuclear Systems Inc.,
and/or the applicants referencing the Topical Report will be expected to revise and resubmit their respective documentation, or submit justification for the continued effective applicability of the Topical Report without r: vision of their respective documentation.
Sincerely, Leland C. Rouse, Chief Advanced Fuel and Spent Fuel Licensing Branch Division of Fuel Cycle and Material Safety
Enclosure:
Review of CASTOR V/21 Barated Stainless Steel Basket Evaluation e-
-- + --~-- - - - - -,.
am-,e
,-,,,.-n---
-,-m
--ve.,-,,-,e-w-.---,,r-w--,-,e----.
-,-,------,-ma,,,-m-em-',-,,,w--,,
,--e,-
.