Semantic search
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Issue date | Title | Topic | |
---|---|---|---|
JPN-99-029, Comment Supporting Proposed Rules 10CFR50 & 72 Re Reporting Requirement for Nuclear Power Reactors | 20 September 1999 | Comment Supporting Proposed Rules 10CFR50 & 72 Re Reporting Requirement for Nuclear Power Reactors | |
JPN-99-022, Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Requirements for Industry Codes & Stds | 22 June 1999 | Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Requirements for Industry Codes & Stds | Backfit |
ML20198L273 | 21 December 1998 | Comment Supporting NEI Re Proposed Rules 10CFR50, 52 & 72 Re Changes,Tests & Experiments | |
JPN-98-052, Comment Supporting Proposed Rules 10CFR50,52 & 72 Re Changes,Tests & Experiments.Util Endorses & Supports Position Presented by NEI & Commends Commission for Initiative to Address Disconnects | 21 December 1998 | Comment Supporting Proposed Rules 10CFR50,52 & 72 Re Changes,Tests & Experiments.Util Endorses & Supports Position Presented by NEI & Commends Commission for Initiative to Address Disconnects | Fuel cladding |
JPN-98-050, Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Monitoring Effectiveness of Maint at Nuclear Power Plants.Encourages NRC Staff to Withdraw Proposed Change & to Work with Nuclear Power Industry & Other Stakeholders to Accomplish Goal | 14 December 1998 | Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Monitoring Effectiveness of Maint at Nuclear Power Plants.Encourages NRC Staff to Withdraw Proposed Change & to Work with Nuclear Power Industry & Other Stakeholders to Accomplish Goal | |
JPN-98-021, Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Codes & Stds | 26 May 1998 | Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Codes & Stds | |
JPN-97-037, Comment on Final Direct Rule Changes to Paragraph (H) of 10CFR50.55a Codes & Standards. Effective Date of New Rule Should Be Delayed Until Listed Concerns Can Be Resolved & Appropriate Changes Incorporated | 1 December 1997 | Comment on Final Direct Rule Changes to Paragraph (H) of 10CFR50.55a Codes & Standards. Effective Date of New Rule Should Be Delayed Until Listed Concerns Can Be Resolved & Appropriate Changes Incorporated | Backfit |
ML20148M647 | 19 June 1997 | Comment Opposing Porposed NRC Bulletin 96-001,suppl 1, CR Insertion Problems | |
ML20133N051 | 5 January 1997 | Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50, Draft Policy Statement on Resturcturing & Economic Deregulation of Electric Util Industry | |
ML20149M462 | 9 December 1996 | Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Draft Policy Statement on Restructuring & Economic Deregulation of Electric Utility Industry | |
ML20077G348 | 8 December 1994 | Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR2,51 & 54 Re Nuclear Power License Renewal | Aging Management License Renewal Backfit |
ML20070P056 | 19 April 1994 | Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re NRC Draft Policy Statement on Use of Decommissioning Trust Funds Before Decommissioning Plan Approval | |
ML20029C577 | 11 March 1994 | Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR20 Re Draft Rule on Decommissioning.Informs That 15 Mrem/Yr Unreasonably Low Fraction of Icrp,Ncrp & Regulatory Public Dose Limit of 100 Mrem/Yr | |
ML20059C303 | 28 December 1993 | Comment Supporting Petition for Rulemaking PRM-21-2 Re Definition of Commercial Grade Item | |
ML20045H875 | 19 July 1993 | Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR55 Re Exam Procedures for Operator Licensing.Supports Rule | |
ML20045F245 | 28 June 1993 | Comment on Proposal Re Radiological Criteria for Decommissioning NRC-licensed Facilities.Opposes Proposed Criteria | Probabilistic Risk Assessment |
ML20044F568 | 20 May 1993 | Comment on Draft Commercial Grade Dedication Insp Procedure 38703,entitled Commercial Grade Procurement Insp. Endorses NUMARC Comments Dtd 930517 | Commercial Grade Dedication |
JPN-02-034, Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50.54 Re Receipt of Byproduct & Special Nuclear Matl | 6 July 1992 | Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50.54 Re Receipt of Byproduct & Special Nuclear Matl | |
JPN-91-021, Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR71,170 & 171, Rev of Fee Schedules;100% Fee Recovery. Endorses NUMARC Comments. Approx 300% Increase in NRC Fees for FY91 Will Have Major Impact Upon Operating & Maint Budgets of Plants | 13 May 1991 | Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR71,170 & 171, Rev of Fee Schedules;100% Fee Recovery. Endorses NUMARC Comments. Approx 300% Increase in NRC Fees for FY91 Will Have Major Impact Upon Operating & Maint Budgets of Plants | |
JPN-91-005, Comment Re SECY-90-347, Regulatory Impact Survey Rept. Util Concurs W/Numarc Comments.Analysis of Info from NUREG-1395 Insufficient to Complete Evaluation.Root Cause Analysis of Seven Themes Listed in SECY-90-347 Recommended | 28 January 1991 | Comment Re SECY-90-347, Regulatory Impact Survey Rept. Util Concurs W/Numarc Comments.Analysis of Info from NUREG-1395 Insufficient to Complete Evaluation.Root Cause Analysis of Seven Themes Listed in SECY-90-347 Recommended | Backfit |
ML20066G441 | 23 January 1991 | Comments on Proposed Rule 10CFR2,50 & 54 Re Nuclear Power Plant License Renewal.Substantive Typo in 901015 Filing on Behalf of Licensee Noted | License Renewal |
ML20058G634 | 30 October 1990 | Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR26 Re fitness-for-duty Program | |
JPN-90-068, Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR51 Re Renewal of Nuclear Plant OLs & NRC Intent to Prepare Generic EIS | 22 October 1990 | Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR51 Re Renewal of Nuclear Plant OLs & NRC Intent to Prepare Generic EIS | |
JPN-90-067, Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR2,50 & 54 Re Nuclear Power Plant License Renewal.Endorses Comments Submitted by NUMARC | 15 October 1990 | Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR2,50 & 54 Re Nuclear Power Plant License Renewal.Endorses Comments Submitted by NUMARC | License Renewal |
ML20065H754 | 15 October 1990 | Comment Re Proposed Rules 10CFR2,50 & 54 on Nuclear Power Plant License Renewal.Commission Assessment of Four Alternatives Should Be Expanded to Include Not Only Safety Considerations But Other Atomic Energy Act Objectives | Aging Management License Renewal |
JPN-90-052, Comment Supporting Petition for Rulemaking PRM-50-55 Re Revs to FSAR | 9 July 1990 | Comment Supporting Petition for Rulemaking PRM-50-55 Re Revs to FSAR | |
JPN-90-050, Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR55 Re Operators Licenses Mod for fitness-for-duty.Proposed Rule Will Place More Stringent Restrictions on Licensed Operators & Unnecessary | 2 July 1990 | Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR55 Re Operators Licenses Mod for fitness-for-duty.Proposed Rule Will Place More Stringent Restrictions on Licensed Operators & Unnecessary | Fitness for Duty |
ML20012C649 | 9 March 1990 | Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50, Fracture Toughness Requirements for Protection Against PTS Events. Any Utilization of NRC Proposed Application of Reg Guide 1.99, Rev 2,would Be Inappropriate W/O re-evaluation by NRC | |
ML20011E486 | 7 February 1990 | Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR71 Re Compatibility of Pu Air Transport Regulations W/Iaea Stds.Supports EEI-UWASTE/NUMARC Comments to Be Provided to NRC by 900209 | |
ML20005F652 | 13 December 1989 | Comment on Proposed Draft Reg Guide DG-1001, Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants. Util Concurs w/industry-wide Position Presented by NUMARC & Offers Addl Comments | |
B13367, Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR30,40,50,60,70,72 & 150 Re Preserving Free Flow of Info to Commission.Nrc Made Wise Choice to Not Impose Any Obligation on Private Parties to Include Affirmative Statement in Employment Agreements | 20 September 1989 | Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR30,40,50,60,70,72 & 150 Re Preserving Free Flow of Info to Commission.Nrc Made Wise Choice to Not Impose Any Obligation on Private Parties to Include Affirmative Statement in Employment Agreements | |
ML20245G072 | 3 August 1989 | Comment on Draft Reg Guide, Assuring Availability of Funds for Decommissioning Nuclear Reactors. Recommends That NRC Recommendation on Trust Agreement Wording Be Deleted or NRC Should Grandfather Existing Trusts Such as for Plants | |
ML20248B620 | 2 August 1989 | Comments on Draft Reg Guide, Assuring Availability of Funds for Decommissioning Nuclear Reactors. NRC Should Permit Use of Potential Tax Refund as Source of Decommissioning Funds | |
ELV-00674, Comment Opposing Proposed Rules 10CFR50,72 & 170 Re Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel in NRC-Approved Storage Casks at Nuclear Power Reactor Sites. 10CFR72.6(c) Should Be Revised to Provide for Storage W/O ISFSI Requirement | 7 July 1989 | Comment Opposing Proposed Rules 10CFR50,72 & 170 Re Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel in NRC-Approved Storage Casks at Nuclear Power Reactor Sites. 10CFR72.6(c) Should Be Revised to Provide for Storage W/O ISFSI Requirement | |
ML20246P606 | 7 July 1989 | Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50, Acceptance of Products Purchased for Use in Nuclear Power Plant Structures,Sys & Components. Significant & Independent Industry Efforts Already Underway to Address Issue | |
ELV-00679, Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50, Acceptance of Products Purchased for Use in Nuclear Power Plant Structures,Sys & Components. Agrees W/Numarc Comments Provided to NRC on 890626 | 5 July 1989 | Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50, Acceptance of Products Purchased for Use in Nuclear Power Plant Structures,Sys & Components. Agrees W/Numarc Comments Provided to NRC on 890626 | |
ML20246K480 | 5 July 1989 | Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50, Acceptance of Products Purchased for Use in Nuclear Power Plant Structures,Sys & Components | |
ML20246D881 | 30 June 1989 | Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50, Acceptance of Products Purchased for Use in Nuclear Power Plant Structures,Sys & Components | |
ML20245K194 | 16 June 1989 | Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR50,72 & 170 Re Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel in NRC-Approved Storage Casks at Nuclear Power Reactor Sites | |
ML20245D248 | 16 June 1989 | Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR50,72 & 170 Re Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel in NRC-Approved Storage Casks at Nuclear Power Reactor Sites. NRC Must Consider Provision in Rule to Permit Indiscriminate Storage of Spent Fuel at Reactors | |
ML20246Q297 | 15 May 1989 | Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants | |
ML20245J019 | 14 April 1989 | Comment Re Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants | |
ML20244B324 | 10 April 1989 | Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants | |
ML20247A297 | 4 April 1989 | Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants | |
ML20246N947 | 8 March 1989 | Comment on Proposed Rev 3 to Reg Guide 1.9 Re Selection Design,Qualification,Testing & Reliability of Diesel Generator Units Used as Onsite Electric Power Sys at Nuclear Power Plants | Probabilistic Risk Assessment Overspeed trip |
B13113, Comment on Proposed Rev 3 to Reg Guide 1.9, Selection, Design,Qualification,Testing & Reliability of Diesel Generator Units.... Util Recommends Rule Be Revised to Incorporate Addl Flexibility in Considering Age of Diesel | 8 March 1989 | Comment on Proposed Rev 3 to Reg Guide 1.9, Selection, Design,Qualification,Testing & Reliability of Diesel Generator Units.... Util Recommends Rule Be Revised to Incorporate Addl Flexibility in Considering Age of Diesel | Probabilistic Risk Assessment Overspeed trip |
ML20236B464 | 8 March 1989 | Comments on Proposed Rev 3 to Reg Guide 1.9, Selection, Design,Qualification,Testing & Reliability of Diesel Generator Units Used as Onsite Electric Power Sys at Nuclear Power Plants. Reg Guide Does Not Provide Flexibility | Probabilistic Risk Assessment Overspeed trip |
JPN-89-008, Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants | 27 February 1989 | Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants | Systematic Assessment of Licensee Performance Exemption Request Backfit |
B13136, Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants.Proposed Rule on Maint Will Not Improve Maint in Plants Nor Improve Safety or Reliability of Plants.Proposed Rule Much Too Vague | 27 February 1989 | Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants.Proposed Rule on Maint Will Not Improve Maint in Plants Nor Improve Safety or Reliability of Plants.Proposed Rule Much Too Vague | Backfit |
ML20235T358 | 27 February 1989 | Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants.Util Endorses Comments Filed by NUMARC & Nuclear Util Backfitting & Reform Group.Rule Fails to Provide Basis for Determining Effective Maint Program | Backfit |