Canister Storage Building Receiving Pit Modification Informal Design Verification

KRIEG, S.A.

Fluor Hanford, Inc.

关键词: Modifications;    Storage Facilities;    Spent Fuel Storage;    Spent Fuel Casks;    11 Nuclear Fuel Cycle And Fuel Materials;   

DOI  :  10.2172/805644
RP-ID  :  SNF-7036, Rev.0
RP-ID  :  AC06-96RL13200
RP-ID  :  805644

美国|英语

来源: UNT Digital Library

【 摘 要 】

The design for modifications to the CSB Cask Receiving pit guides was verified by the informal design verification (meeting) method on August 9, 2000. The invited list of attendees and the meeting attendance sheet are included in attachment 1. The design modifications that were reviewed are documented in ECN 654484 (attachment 2). The requirement that the design is to be verified against is to ''center the transportation cask sufficiently to allow installation of the guide funnel on the cask ({+-} 0.25 inches or less)''. The alternatives considered are detailed in attachment 3. Alternative number 4, ''Modify The Pit Guides'', was determined to be the preferred alternative primarily due to considerations of simplicity, reliability, and low cost. Alternative 1, ''Rotate the impact Absorber 180{sup o}'', was successfully performed but was considered a temporary fix that was not acceptable for a long term operational mode. The requirement to position the receiving crane accurately enough to lower the transportation cask into the pit with the redesigned guides was discussed and considered to be achievable without undue effort from the operator. The tolerance on the OD of the transfer cask was discussed ({+-} 1/8 inch) relative to the clearance with the guides. As-built dimensions for the cask OD will be looked at to verify sufficient clearance exists with the maximum cask OD. The final design thickness of the shims under the guides will be based on the as-built cask OD dimensions and field measurements between the pit guides. The need for a ''plastic'' cover for the guides was discussed and deemed unnecessary. Thermal growth of the cask OD was calculated at 3-5 mils and considered insignificant. The possibility of reducing the OD of the guide funnel was reviewed but this was considered impractical due to the requirement for the MCO to miss the edge of the funnel in case of a MCO drop. One of the transportation casks have the lift trunions installed 3/8 inch off center. This is not expected to present a problem, but needs to be verified. Operations personnel were not in attendance to discuss the method for lowering the cask into the pit, however it was the consensus of those who observed the lowering operation performed by startup that it is operationally viable. The proposed design will be presented to Operations for review prior to issuance of the ECN. The final conclusion of the attendees is that the design meets the requirement ''center the cask sufficiently to allow installation of the guide funnel.''