The 9977 / 9978 General Purpose Fissile Package (GPFP), has been designed as a cost-effective, user-friendly replacement for the DOT 6M Specification Package for transporting Plutonium and Uranium metals and oxides. To ensure the capability of the 9977 GPFP to withstand the regulatory crush test, urethane foam was chosen for the impact absorbing overpack. As part of the package development it was necessary to confirm that the urethane foam overpack would provide the required protection for the containment vessel during the thermal test portion of the Hypothetical Accident Conditions Sequential Tests. Development tests of early prototypes were performed, using a furnace. Based on the results of the development tests, detailed design enhancements were incorporated into the final design. Examples of the definitive 9977 design configuration were subjected to an all-engulfing pool fire test, as part of the HAC Sequential Tests, to support the application for certification. Testing has confirmed the package's ability to withstand the HAC thermal tests. INTRODUCTIONThe 9977 / 9978 GPFP has been designed as a replacement for DOT 6M Specification Packaging. As such, it must be able to transport the Plutonium and Uranium metals and oxides, meet the Type B performance requirements, and be economical to build and use. In order to enable the GPFP to withstand the Hypothetical Accident Condition (HAC) Crush Test, urethane foam was chosen for the impact absorbing overpack material. Finite element modeling (FEM) indicated that the rigid urethane foam-filled overpack employed by the GPFP design would be able to withstand the Crush Test.

General Purpose Fissile Package (GPFP) prototypes of two configurations, 16 in. and 18 ½ in. diameter drum overpacks, were subjected to the free-drop, crush, puncture, and thermal Hypothetical Accident Condition (HAC) sequential tests for 10CFR71, Type B packagings. The tests demonstrated that the prototypes are very robust, easily withstanding the structural tests. The tests also confirmed that the urethane foam-filled overpack was able to withstand the thermal test. INTRODUCTIONThe GPFP packaging design is a proposed replacement for DOT Specification 6M Metal Packaging. The replacement packaging must be able to transport the same contents as the 6M, meet the Type B performance requirements, and be economical to build and use. The GPFP must be able to withstand the Hypothetical Accident Condition (HAC) Crush Test for DOE missions. The Crush Test requirement presents a severe challenge to drum type packaging. Finite element modeling (FEM) indicated that the rigid urethane foam-filled overpack employed by the GPFP design would be able to withstand the Crush Test. In order to confirm the predictions of the finite element model, prototype packagings were fabricated and subjected to the HAC sequential performance tests, less the immersion test.

Separation of the closure lid from the drum-type radioactive material packages employing the conventional clamp-ring closure has been a safety concern. Currently, the evaluation of drum-closure separation problems resorts to expensive and time-consuming tests. Therefore, an analytical capability to predict drum-closure separation is desired. However, the conventional methods of dynamic analysis are not applicable to this subject. The difficulty of the problem mainly lies in solving the complicated preload stresses on the multiple contacted surfaces during claim-ring tightening and in integrating the preload results with the subsequent drop simulation. A technique has been previously proposed by Wu for the dynamic analyses of containers with locking-ring closures (Reference 1). This paper presents a refinement of the proposed technique and also extends the technique from the dynamic simulation of one single drop to the simulation of two sequential drops. The finite-element method with explicit numerical integration scheme is utilized to simulate both the closure bolt tightening process and the drop impact. The essential aspects of the proposed technique include: quasi-static simulation of clamp-ring tightening process; association of the floor motion with the package motion before the drop simulation starts; and creation of the package velocity before impact starts. To verify the proposed numerical technique, an analysis is performed for the 6M Package with a standard clamp-ring closure to simulate the following three sequential loading conditions: the preload caused by tightening the clamp ring; a NCT 4-foot drop; and a HAC 30-foot drop. The analytical results are compared with the results of the sequential NCT and HAC drop tests of a 6M Package with the standard clamp-ring closure. The test results have verified that the proposed numerical technique is capable of predicting the drum closure separation with respect to drop heights as well as the deformed shape of the package.

Results of tests of drum-type RAM packages employing conventional clamp-ring closures have caused concern over the DOT 6M Specification Package. To clarify these issues, a series of tests were performed to determine the response of the clamp-ring closure to the regulatory Hypothetical Accident Condition (9m) drop test for packages at maximum allowable weight. Three enhanced closure designs were also tested: the Clamshell, plywood disk reinforcement, and J-Clip. The results of the tests showed that the standard closure was unable to retain the lid for both Center-of-Gravity-Over-Corner and Shallow Angle cases for the standard package at its maximum allowed weight. Similar results were found for packages dropped from a reduced height. The Clamshell design provided the best performance of the enhanced closures.

Under the authorization of the Department of Transportation, per 49 CFR Part 173.7(d), Type B and fissile radioactive materials packagings made by or under the direction of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) may be used for the transportation of Class 7 materials when evaluated, approved, and certified by DOE against packaging standards equivalent to those specified in 10 CFR Part 71. The DOE certificate is issued on the basis of a safety analysis report of the package design and application. The applicant must demonstrate to DOE the package meets the standards in the 10 CFR Part 71. Since the Type B and fissile radioactive materials packaging standards specified in 10 CFR Part 71 are performance based standards, guides and other tools are necessary to demonstrate how a package design meets the standards. Two essential tools used by packaging applicants and reviewers to quantify and demonstrate compliance with the safety standards/requirements of the CFR are the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel (B&PV) Code and ASME NQA-1. The DOE Packaging Certification Program develops and sponsors training courses for packaging applicants and reviewers. Many of these courses are required training by DOE for persons that manage or prepare safety analysis reports for package designs (i.e., applications) submitted to the DOE for certification. The ASME B&PV Code and NQA-1 are ubiquitous in the DOE core training courses. This paper provides an overview how the ASME B&PV Code and NQA-1 are implemented in DOE Packaging Certification Program training courses.