ML16256A003
| ML16256A003 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook  |
| Issue date: | 09/08/2016 |
| From: | Justin Poole Plant Licensing Branch 1 |
| To: | Grinnell D C-10 Research & Education Foundation |
| References | |
| Download: ML16256A003 (3) | |
Text
1 NRR-PMDAPEm Resource From:
Poole, Justin Sent:
Thursday, September 08, 2016 11:18 AM To:
Debbie - Gmail
Subject:
RE: RE: Re: Seabrook's License Amendment Sorry for the confusion with the typo.
What I was trying to say was that if the staff finds an application acceptable for review, we will notice the amendment in the Federal Register for comment and continue on with the technical review. If the staff does not find an application acceptable for review, it means that the NRC will no longer review the application and therefore we would not notice the amendment in the Federal Register for comment. The licensee would have to send in a new (and improved) application and the NRC would start the process over.
Keep in mind I am speaking in general how our process works. This can be found in the office instruction I attached to the previous email. The NRC staff is still performing the acceptance review of the ASR amendment and has not made a determination (acceptable or not) at this time.
Justin C. Poole Project Manager NRR/DORL/LPLI-2 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (301)415-2048 From: Debbie - Gmail [1]
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2016 10:23 AM To: Poole, Justin
Subject:
[External_Sender] RE: Re: Seabrook's License Amendment Hello Justin, What in the world does when if/when means. when the amendment is submitted on the Fed Reg???
Debbie From: Poole, Justin tin.Poole@nrc.gov
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2016 8:40 AM To: Deborah Grinnell <grinnelldebbie2@gmail.com>
Cc: Broaddus, Doug <Doug.Broaddus@nrc.gov>; Bower, Fred <Fred.Bower@nrc.gov>
Subject:
RE: Re: Seabrook's License Amendment Hello Debbie, Which time frame are you referring to when you say what is the justification for selecting the time frames proposed?
Yes I will send you an email when if/when the amendment is published in the Federal Register. I say if because we are still doing our acceptance review of the document. The amendment would only get noticed in the Federal Register if we accept the document for review. For more information on the acceptance review, I
2 have attached our publicly available office instruction on how the staff performs acceptance reviews for license amendments (and other licensing actions).
Justin C. Poole Project Manager NRR/DORL/LPLI-2 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (301)415-2048 From: Deborah Grinnell [2]
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2016 5:35 PM To: Poole, Justin <Justin.Poole@nrc.gov>
Subject:
[External_Sender] Re: Seabrook's License Amendment Are will yousorry!
On Sep 7, 2016, at 5:16 PM, Deborah Grinnell <grinnelldebbie2@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello Justin, We are reading the Seabrook License Amendment, we have a question. What is the justification for selecting the time frames proposed? We you contact me asap when the SLA is submitted into the Federal Reg on the day?
Thank you, Debbie
Hearing Identifier:
NRR_PMDA Email Number:
3044 Mail Envelope Properties (Justin.Poole@nrc.gov20160908111800)
Subject:
RE: RE: Re: Seabrook's License Amendment Sent Date:
9/8/2016 11:18:29 AM Received Date:
9/8/2016 11:18:00 AM From:
Poole, Justin Created By:
Justin.Poole@nrc.gov Recipients:
"Debbie - Gmail" <grinnelldebbie2@gmail.com>
Tracking Status: None Post Office:
Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 3044 9/8/2016 11:18:00 AM Options Priority:
Standard Return Notification:
No Reply Requested:
No Sensitivity:
Normal Expiration Date:
Recipients Received: