ML20207E351
| ML20207E351 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 07200022 |
| Issue date: | 05/20/1999 |
| From: | Donnell J AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20207E339 | List: |
| References | |
| ISFSI, NUDOCS 9906070010 | |
| Download: ML20207E351 (1) | |
Text
e e
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board In the Matter of
)
)
PRIVATE FUEL STORAGE L.L.C.
)
Docket No. 72-22
)
(Private Fuel Storage Facility)
)
AFFIDAVIT OF JOHN DONNELL CITY OF ENGLEWOOD
)
) SS:
STATE OF COLORADO
)
I, John Donnell, being duly sworn, states as follows:
I am Project Director for Private Fuel Storage, L.L.C. ("PFS"). I report directly to John 4
Parkyn, the Chairman of the Board of PFS. In my capacity as Project Director, I am responsible for the execution and integration of the legal and technical activities of the Private Fuel Storage Facility ("PFSF") project. I have read the responses to Interrogatory Nos. 3 and 5 of the Responses to SUWA's First Requests for Discovery to Applicant PFS and certify that the stateinents in such responses are true and correct to the best of my personal knowledge and belief.
1A <h 1
Sworn to and subscribed before me this J?e # ay d
of #f4 v,1999.
9906070010 990601 O_ 4 hx.
5" 7288!2 Motary Public My commission expires:
o 4 a/ ? cod
- .:::::::::::=,
J0 ANNE G. MOON ll NOTARY PUBUC l'l STATE OF COLORADO a ::::::::::::= :::::::=;
My Commission Expires 04/21/2003
((/,
[
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION -
Before the Atomic Safety and Licensine Board In the Matter of.
)
)
PRIVATE FUEL STORAGE L.L.C.
)
Docket No. 72-22
)
(Private Fuel Storage Facility)
)
AFFIDAVIT OF DONALD WAYNE LEWIS CITY OF REDWING
)
) SS:
STATE OF MINNESOTA
)
I, Donald Wayne Lewis, being duly sworn, states as follows:
1.
I am Lead Mechanical Engineer with Stone & Webster for the Private Fuel Storage Facility (PFSF) project. In that position I am responsible for ensuring that all mechanically related systems for the PFSF meet the principal design criteria as stated in Chapter 3 of the PFSF Safety Analysis Report (SAR), including the storage system's thermal performance. I am providing this affidavit, in support of a motion for partial summary disposition of Contention Utah H in the above captioned proceeding, to describe the revised thermal analysis performed by Private Fuel Storage, L.L.C.
2.
My professional and educational experience is summarized in the curriculum vitae attached as Exhibit I to this aflidavit. I have been assigned to severaljobs since 1991 that specifically involved the design of spent nuclear fuel storage and storage packages, including the design of spent fuel storage systems at the Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant, Maine Yankee Atomic Plant, Indian Point 2 Nuclear Plant, Yucca Mountain National Repository, and Goodhue County. I have specifically had to ensure the thermal performance of the storage systems on all the above jobs except for Yucca Mountain.
Q R^$2!S W 3 V f
E
- o. ;
)
I
,4 7:
3.'
I am knowledgeable of the design of the spent fuel storage casks to be used at the-
' PFSF for the storage of spent nuclear fuel, their thermal characteristics, and their responses to
. high-temperature thermal transients'.: I am familiar with the original and revised thermal L calculations for the spent fuel storage casks to be used at the PFSF.
)
' 4.
On December 10,1998, the NRC Staff filed its recond round of safety Requests
, for Additional Information, including RAI 4-2, which asked PFS to 1)" clarify the thermal energy balance between the concrete pad, casks, and environment" and 2) "[d]emonstrate that
]
the ' chimney effect' incorporated into the design of the TranStor and HI-STORM casks is unaffected." In its response to RAI 4-2, dated February 10,1999, PFS filed a revised thermal
. calculation to supplement the original vendor calculations.
5.
PFS asked Holtec International to perform the revised calculation for the HI-STORM 100 spent fuel storage cask to show that the issues raised by the Staffin RAI 4-2 do not affect PFS's conclusions that the thermal design of both storage casks to be used at the PFSF are adequate. PFS had the calculation perfonned for the HI STORM 100 Hm it would experience the highest temperatures under the relevant conditions. RAI Resp. 4-2 at 3.
Specifically, the thermal performance of the HI-Storm 100 results in greater temperatures of.the fuel cladding than those for TranStor under the same external conditions. This is specifically due to storage system design and thermal modeling differences between the vendors. Therefore, all other conditions being equal, the calculated temperature of the spent fuel cladding from a fully load,d HI-Storm 100 cask will be greater than that from a fully loaded TranStor cask and
' therefore is bounding.
l 6.'
A copy of PFS's responses to the second round RAIs, including PFS's response to RAI 4-2, was sent to the State of Utah by ovemight mail on February 11,1999. A copy of the ~
calculations and other backup to PFS's responses, including the backup calculation for PFS's responses to RAI 4-2, were sent to the State for next business day delivery on February 13,1999.
7.
I'have reviewed the State's bases underlying the three pertinent subparts of Utah H as well as the contention itself. The new thermal calculation described in PFS's response to
- RAI 4-2, and described in greater detail in the Affidavit ofIndresh Rampall, addresses the issues raised in each of subparts 3,4, and 5 of Utah H.
1 s:
Ie.
O z-Donald Wayne L6g Sworn to before me this /
day of May 1999.
T
! i, MARLYS E.DNAS DMder) [. Owdp unwrunomssem
- .."
- ::$Y,$"._,
NotarfPub/c'
~
i !
9 My Commission expires SO()f i
I
)
1
. a