ML071830055
| ML071830055 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Davis Besse  |
| Issue date: | 05/10/2007 |
| From: | Ho Nieh Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Tanya Mensah, Lisa Regner, Rosenberg S Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Mensah T | |
| References | |
| Download: ML071830055 (2) | |
Text
From:
Ho Nieh To:
Lisa Regner; Stacey Rosenberg; Tanya Mensah Date:
5/10/2007 8:50:17 AM
Subject:
Fwd: Dis-service to NC WARN Hey folks.
Can you take a look into this?
I would like to close the loop with the petitioners.
Thanks.
Ho
>>> "Dave Lochbaum" <dlochbaum@ucsusa.org> 05/09/2007 3:05 PM >>>
Hello John:
Attached is document ML070580345, a letter dated March 6, 2007, from NRC to Progress Energy about Harris. It's final page contains the cc list, or service list. You will not see your name on it. Or mine. Or Paul Gunter's.
You submitted a 2.206 petition to the NRC on behalf of NC WARN, NIRS, UCS, and others. According to NRC Management Directive 8.11 on how to handle 2.206 petitions, the petitioner is to be added to the service list and remain on the service list for 90 days after the final decision on the petition is issued. It the very first item on the list of things to do once the PRB accepts the petition (see bottom of page 16 in MD 8.11). The very first item. No. 1. The first thing on the list.
You got dissed. You didn't get added to the service list.
Attached is a NRC letter dated July 24, 2003, to the owner of the Davis-Besse nuclear plant. I'm on its service list because I'd petitioned the NRC earlier in the year.
Attached is a NRC letter dated March 30, 2007, to the owner of the Indian Point nuclear plant. Jim Riccio, Philip Musegaas, Michael Mariotte (for Paul Gunter), and I are on it because we'd petitioned the NRC in April 2000 and then again in September 2004. ( Both final director's decisions were issued ages ago - but the management directive isn't really clear about the 90 days being all in a row or anything).
Since UCS and NIRS have been added to the service lists in the past when we petitioned the NRC, our names on this petition seem unlikely to have caused NRC to skip this part, the first part, of their procedure. Shoot, even Greenpeace got added to the service list. But NC WARN didn't. Must reflect NRC bias against the south.
Even though you got dissed, and caused NIRS and UCS to get dissed by association, we still like NC WARN. Of course, we may have to file separate petitions in the future. We actually expended considerable effort back in the late 1990s getting MD 8.11 revised to have the NRC put we non-Southern petitioners on the service lists.
Take care, Dave Lochbaum UCS
Mail Envelope Properties (464314FB.2D2 : 23 : 34934)
Subject:
Fwd: Dis-service to NC WARN Creation Date 5/10/2007 8:50:03 AM From:
Ho Nieh Created By:
HKN@nrc.gov Recipients nrc.gov OWGWPO02.HQGWDO01 TME (Tanya Mensah) nrc.gov TWGWPO03.HQGWDO01 LMR2 (Lisa Regner)
SLR1 (Stacey Rosenberg)
Post Office Route OWGWPO02.HQGWDO01 nrc.gov TWGWPO03.HQGWDO01 nrc.gov Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 3362 5/10/2007 8:50:02 AM TEXT.htm 2711 ML070580345.pdf 86031 5/10/2007 8:48:37 AM 20030724-db-si-report.pdf 141055 5/10/2007 8:48:38 AM 20070330-ip-nrc-ir-component-design-bases.pdf 274545 5/10/2007 8:48:41 AM Options Expiration Date:
None Priority:
Standard ReplyRequested:
No Return Notification:
None Concealed
Subject:
No Security:
Standard Junk Mail Handling Evaluation Results Message is not eligible for Junk Mail handling Message is from an internal sender Junk Mail settings when this message was delivered Junk Mail handling disabled by User Junk Mail handling disabled by Administrator Junk List is not enabled Junk Mail using personal address books is not enabled Block List is not enabled