ML13004A272
| ML13004A272 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Callaway  |
| Issue date: | 09/02/2010 |
| From: | Lawrence Criscione NRC/RES/DRA |
| To: | Sherry Schwarz Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML130040225 | List:
|
| References | |
| FOIA/PA-2012-0259 | |
| Download: ML13004A272 (3) | |
Text
Criscione, Lawrence From:
Criscione, Lawrence Sent:
Thursday, September 02, 2010 4:02 PM To:
Schwarz, Sherry Cc:
Leeds, Eric; Markley, Michael
Subject:
FW: Callaway Plant Concerns Attachments:
ML1020703740.pdf; October 21, 2003 critical parameters.pdf
- Sherry, The information I promised you is in the emails below.
I met with Mike Weber today and he suggested that I discuss my concerns with Eric.
I don't mind meeting with Eric alone or with whomever he decides should be present. I've copied Mike Markley on this email. I don't think it important that he attend, but he should be able to provide Eric any background information.
I am leaving the office at 16:30 and not returning until noon on Sept. 13. I should be periodically checking my email if you or anyone else have any questions next week.
Thank you, Larry From: Crisdone, Lawrence Sent: Friday, August 27, 2010 7:50 AM To: Thadani, Mohan; Markley, Michael
Subject:
FW: Callaway Plant Concerns Mike/Mohan, The email trail below is the latest status that I am aware of concerning the October 21, 2003 issue.
As I told you on the phone today, I believe it would be beneficial for NRR to receive my perspectives on the incident as they are different from Ameren's and Region IV's. I have suggestions on how we can handle this issue. I am not asking for anyone to advocate for me; I am just looking to share my input.
You do not need to review this before Wednesday, but it would probably make our meeting shorter if you do.
- Thanks, Larry......
From: Criscione, Lawrence Sent: Thursday, August 26, 2010 6:40 PM To: Zimmerman, Roy Cc: Banks, Mark; Beasley, Benjamin
Subject:
FW: Callaway Plant Concerns
- Roy, I was made aware of the attached document today. See the highlighted text on page 5 (highlighting was added by me).
It appears that on August 13, the CNO of Ameren came to Washington to discuss the October 21, 2003 passive shutdown with Bill Borchardt, Martin Virgilio and Mike Weber. I don't know what was said by either side at the meeting, but from the highlighted text it appears Ameren requested the meeting to inform the EDO that "they are doing everything they can" with regard to the October 21, 2003 passive reactor shutdown.
I do not know what Ameren is doing, and I do not know what the EDO told them he expects them to do. I do know what I expect. I expect Ameren to submit a draft SER of the incident to INPO. If Ameren does this, then I am completely satisfied - of course, the draft SER needs to mention the eight bulleted items in my email from yesterday (original email on this trail).
It is encouraging to me that Ameren is taking this issue seriously enough to discuss it with the EDO. It is discouraging to me that the NRC is not taking this issue seriously enough to "Exchange Perspectives" with me. My perspective is that for Ameren to claim "they are doing everything they can" then they need to be informing the industry of the incident through the SEE-IN program run by INPO. Although the EDO might not be comfortable ordering Ameren to do this, he should certainly feel comfortable suggesting to Mr. Heflin -
when it is Mr. Heflin who requested the meeting - that Ameren might wish to consider owning up to the errors made by its operators and drafting an Significant Event Report for INPO.
You can pass this email along to Messrs. Borchardt, Virgilio and Weber if you believe it appropriate. I intend to request an "Open Door Policy" meeting with them in the future to exchange perspectives, but I first want to discuss this issue with my chain of command (Coe, Lui, Lyons and Sheron). The purpose of this email is just to keep you updated. If you believe there is appropriate action you can take then that is fine, but there's nothing I specifically know of or am requesting.
I have copied Mark Banks (IG) and Ben Beasley (Branch Chief) on this email to keep them informed. IG does not believe they have a role in this issue, but they are interested in seeing that it is satisfactorily resolved. Ben is working on coordinating a time for me to meet with my division/office chain of command. I do not expect my chain of command to advocate for me as this issue does not in any way involve RES; I just wish to give them my side of the story since they are being informed of it from other offices.
From the August 5 document I attached, it appears Ameren wishes to work with us to resolve this issue. If this is the case, I believe that the EDO suggesting to Ameren that the incident be documented in the SEE-IN network is the cleanest and simplest solution.
Thanks for your help, L a r ry.
From: Criscione, Lawrence Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2010 3:57 PM To: Zimmerman, Roy
Subject:
RE: Callaway Plant Concerns In early 2009 I had only FOIA'd the ARB minutes for Case 4-2007-049. When my FOIA appeal was rejected, I gave up FOlAing ARB minutes. On Monday I FOIA'd the ARB minutes for all the allegations/investigations associated with the October 21, 2003 shutdown. Maybe I'll learn be able to see them and learn something.
Thanks for following up.
From: Zimmerman, Roy Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2010 2:58 PM To: Criscione, Lawrence
Subject:
RE: Callaway Plant Concerns
[Email is included elsewhere]
2
From: Zimmerman, Roy Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2010 2:58 PM To: Criscione, Lawrence
Subject:
RE: Callaway Plant Concerns Larry, I did confirm that NRR is working on an Info Notice. Also I'm told that that the ARM meeting minutes will likely not be predecisional at a point in the future and would be available by FOIA. Roy From: Criscione, Lawrence Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2010 11:31 AM To: Raspa, Rossana; Banks, Mark Cc: Zimmerman, Roy; McCrary, Cheryl;
Subject:
Callaway Plant Concerns Rossana/Mark,
[Email is included elsewhere]