ML20064N393: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(StriderTol Bot change)
(StriderTol Bot change)
 
Line 17: Line 17:


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:}}
{{#Wiki_filter:.    -
f '' i  ,g g                                AFFIDAVIT OF PETER L. ANDERSON ON NECNP I.B.1 PETER L. ANDERSON, being on oath, de. poses and says as follows:
: 1. I am a Senior Systems Engineer, employed by Yankee Atomic Electric Company. I am currently assigned to the Seabrook Project. My professional qualifications appear in the Operating License Application (FSAR Chapter 13).
                                          ~
: 2. 10CFR50, Appendix A, Genera 1 Design Criterion 34 states:      "A (emphasis i            added) system to remove residual heat shall be provided..."7 It does not specify or make reference to the steam dump valves, turbine valves or the steam dumping system.
In responding to NECNP's first set of interrogatories, we have identified the system (s) in the Seabrook design which provide or support the function
,            of residual heat ra:aoval and meet the requirements of GDC 34.      The Seabrook design does not require the use of the steam dump valves, turbine valves or steam dumping system to meet these requirements.
Additionally, in responding to this same set of interrogatories, it was stated that all applicable portions of the identified systems, which are essential to perform or support the function of residual heat removal, are, in fact, safety grade and environmentally qualified pursuant to the requirements of GDC 4.
Therefore, it has been demonstrated that the Applicaut has satisfied the requirements of GDC 34 in that a system has been provided to remove residual heat, and that system is safety grade ana has been environmentally qualified satisfying the requirements of GDC 4.
Based on the above, I feel there is no issue relative to NECNP Contention I.B.1 on which factual hearings are warranted.
W Pe'ter L. And'ersod COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
!        Middlesex, ss                                                        February, 1983 Then appeared before me the above suscribed Peter L. Anderson and made oath that he was the author of the foregoing affidavit and the statements set forth therein are true to the best of his knowledge.
                                                                  .NS              4.
Allen L.          , Jr. No try Public My Comm        n  pires    ust 5, 1988
                          ~
B302160216 830209 PDR ADOCK 05000443 0                PDR}}

Latest revision as of 11:19, 6 January 2021

Affidavit of Pl Anderson,Supporting Ninth Motion for Summary Disposition of New England Coalition on Nuclear Pollution Contention I.B.1
ML20064N393
Person / Time
Site: Seabrook  NextEra Energy icon.png
Issue date: 02/28/1983
From: Patricia Anderson
YANKEE ATOMIC ELECTRIC CO.
To:
Shared Package
ML20064N375 List:
References
NUDOCS 8302160216
Download: ML20064N393 (1)


Text

. -

f i ,g g AFFIDAVIT OF PETER L. ANDERSON ON NECNP I.B.1 PETER L. ANDERSON, being on oath, de. poses and says as follows:

1. I am a Senior Systems Engineer, employed by Yankee Atomic Electric Company. I am currently assigned to the Seabrook Project. My professional qualifications appear in the Operating License Application (FSAR Chapter 13).

~

2. 10CFR50, Appendix A, Genera 1 Design Criterion 34 states: "A (emphasis i added) system to remove residual heat shall be provided..."7 It does not specify or make reference to the steam dump valves, turbine valves or the steam dumping system.

In responding to NECNP's first set of interrogatories, we have identified the system (s) in the Seabrook design which provide or support the function

, of residual heat ra:aoval and meet the requirements of GDC 34. The Seabrook design does not require the use of the steam dump valves, turbine valves or steam dumping system to meet these requirements.

Additionally, in responding to this same set of interrogatories, it was stated that all applicable portions of the identified systems, which are essential to perform or support the function of residual heat removal, are, in fact, safety grade and environmentally qualified pursuant to the requirements of GDC 4.

Therefore, it has been demonstrated that the Applicaut has satisfied the requirements of GDC 34 in that a system has been provided to remove residual heat, and that system is safety grade ana has been environmentally qualified satisfying the requirements of GDC 4.

Based on the above, I feel there is no issue relative to NECNP Contention I.B.1 on which factual hearings are warranted.

W Pe'ter L. And'ersod COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS

! Middlesex, ss February, 1983 Then appeared before me the above suscribed Peter L. Anderson and made oath that he was the author of the foregoing affidavit and the statements set forth therein are true to the best of his knowledge.

.NS 4.

Allen L. , Jr. No try Public My Comm n pires ust 5, 1988

~

B302160216 830209 PDR ADOCK 05000443 0 PDR