ML20041G391
| ML20041G391 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Quad Cities  |
| Issue date: | 03/16/1982 |
| From: | Bevan R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20041G387 | List: |
| References | |
| ISSUANCES-SP, NUDOCS 8203220194 | |
| Download: ML20041G391 (2) | |
Text
.
UtilTED STATES OF A!' ERICA fiUCLEAR 4EGULATORY COMMISS10f; BEFORE Tt!E ATOMIC SAFETY Af;D LICEf1SII;G BOARD In the Matter of
)
)
COMM0t; WEALTH EDISOfi COMPAfiY
)
Docket tios. 50-254-SP
-)
50-E65-SP (Quad Cities Station, Units 1
)
(Spent Fuel Pool Modification) and 2)
)
AFFIDAVIT OF ROBY BEVAli Ofi C0fiTEfiTI0ft 7A I, Roby Bevan, being duly sworn, state that I am an employee of the U.S. fiuclear Regulatory Commisison (fiRC). My present position is Operating Reactors Project Manager, Operating Reactors Branch #2, Division of Licensing within the Office of fiuclear Reactor Regulation.
The purpose of my affidavit is to respond to Contention 7a which has to do with increased risk to public health and safety from the postulated accident scenario involving the chimney (vent stack) falling into the spent fuel pool containing additional fuel resulting from the licensee's proposed action.
In considering this contention, I have reviewed and evaluated the report entitled Tornado and Straight Wind Hazard Probability for Dresden Nuclear Power Reactor Site, Illinois, by James R. Mcdonald, P.E., dated May,1980, prepared for the U.S. fluclear Regulatory Commission, Division of Reactor Safety Research.
I have also reviewed and evaluated the letter from Mcdonald to Mr. Robert G. Fitzgibbons, Jr., dated February 5,1982, addressing tornado risk at the Quad Cities site, and assessing the applicability of the earlier Dresden site study to the Quad Cities site.
8203220194 820316
{'DRADOCK 05000254 PDR
E
. I have also reviewed and evaluated the Guad Cities Vent Stack Re-Analysis Report prepared by Sargent and Lundy, Engineer, which reanalyzes and confirms that portion of the Quad Cities Safety Analysis Report concerning the design capability of the chimney to withstand wind loads and evaluating the probability of the chimney falling into the spent fuel pool.
Finally, I have reen no evidence or reasons set forth by any party to support the assertions in Contention 7a regarding increased nealth and safety risks resulting from the chimney falling into the spent fuel pool containing additional spent fuel as a result of the licensee's proposed action.
On the basis of the foregoing considerations, and other considerations of reasonable technical judgment being brought to bear on this matter, I support the withdrawal of Contention 7a.
h<w V 1
K65y Bevan County of l4ontgomery State of Maryland Subscribed and Sworn to before me this // Aday of flarch,1982.
cMa bl
/MNV
'NotaryPgblic[
My Commission Expires: Od /, / 97.2_.s
/
/
.