ML19025A150: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
 
(StriderTol Bot change)
 
Line 16: Line 16:


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:PUBLIC SUBMISSION As of: 1/25/19 8:27 AM Received:
{{#Wiki_filter:PUBLIC SUBMISSION As of: 1/25/19 8:27 AM Received: January 22, 2019 Status: Pending_Post Tracking No. 1k3-97tv-g6va Comments Due: January 22, 2019 Submission Type: Web Docket: NRC-2018-0280 Virginia Electric and Power Company; Dominion Energy Virginia: Surry Power Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2 Comment On: NRC-2018-0280-0001 Virginia Electric and Power Company; Dominion Energy Virginia: Surry Power Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2 Document: NRC-2018-0280-DRAFT-0007 Comment on FR Doc # 2018-27547 Submitter Information Name: Scott Price Organization: Alliance for a Progressive Virginia General Comment The Alliance for a Progressive Virginia strongly opposes a further extension of the license of the Surry NPP.
January 22, 2019 Status: Pending_Post Tracking No.
It is clear that these reactors were never designed to remain in opporation for such long periods of time. The NRC is aware of the issues concerning aging facilities including reactor vessel embrittlement, irradiation assisted stress-1corrosion cracking of reactor internals and degradation of concrete structures, electrical cables and buried pipes. We are deeply concerned that the NRC is using a one size fits all approach to relicensing Surry NPP for an additional 20 years. We believe it is extremely premature to innitiate this process13 years before the first license extensions end in 2032 and 2033.
1k3-97tv-g6vaComments Due:
Furthermore, we note with alarm that documents exist that appear to show the NRC granted Dominions requests for relief and exemptions prior to Dominion submitting their application for subsequent license renewal. This seems to demonstrate a deeply problematic and potentially inappropriately close relationship between regulators and industry. With this in mind we are further concerned at the number and frequency of postponed inspections, tests and examinations that did not meet 100% coverage. At the least these tests need to be fully completed and all of the results made publicly available prior to any further review.
January 22, 2019 Submission Type:
APV believes further steps must first be taken before any relicensing at Surry NPP proceeds. There is NO need to rush forward, instead the public needs a full accounting based on good science and free of industry bias.
Web Docket: NRC-2018-0280Virginia Electric and Power Company; Dominion Energy Virginia: Surry Power Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2 Comment On:
Page 1 of 1 01/25/2019 https://www.fdms.gov/fdms/getcontent?objectId=0900006483a01116&format=xml&showorig=false SUNSI Review Complete Template = ADM-013 E-RIDS=ADM-03 ADD=Eric Oesterle, Tam Tran, Barbara Hayes COMMENT (7)
NRC-2018-0280-0001Virginia Electric and Power Company; Dominion Energy Virginia: Surry Power Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2 Document:
PUBLICATION DATE:
NRC-2018-0280-DRAFT-0007 Comment on FR Doc # 2018-27547 Submitter InformationName: Scott Price Organization:
12/20/2018 CITATION 83 FR 65367}}
Alliance for a Progressive Virginia General Comment The Alliance for a Progressive Virgin ia strongly opposes a further extensio n of the license of the Surry NPP.
It is clear that these reactors were never designed to remain in opporation for such long periods of time. The NRC is aware of the issues concerni ng aging facilities including reactor vessel embr ittlement, irradiation assisted stress-1corrosion cracking of reactor internals and degradation of concrete structures, electrical cables and buried pipes. We are deeply concerned that the NRC is using a one size fits all approach to relicensing Surry NPP for an additional 20 years. We believe it is extremely premature to innitiate this process13 years before the first license extensions end in 2032 and 2033.
Furthermore, we note with alarm that documents exis t that appear to show the NRC granted Dominions requests for relief and exemptions prior to Dominion submitting their applicati on for subsequent license renewal. This seems to demonstrate a deeply problemat ic and potentially inappropr iately close relationship between regulators and industry. With this in mind we are further concerned at the number and frequency of postponed inspections, tests and examinat ions that did not meet 100% covera ge. At the least these tests need to be fully completed and all of the results made publicly available prior to any further review.
APV believes further steps must first be taken before any relicensing at Surry NPP proceeds. There is NO need to rush forward, instead the public needs a full accounting based on good sc ience and free of industry bias.Page 1 of 1 01/25/201 9 https://www.fdms.gov/fdms/g etcontent?objectId=0900006483a01116&fo rmat=xml&showorig=fals e}}

Latest revision as of 05:54, 5 January 2025

Comment (7) of Scott Price on Virginia Electric and Power Company; Dominion Energy Virginia: Surry Power Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2
ML19025A150
Person / Time
Site: Surry  Dominion icon.png
Issue date: 01/22/2019
From: Sarah Price
Alliance for a Progressive Virginia
To:
Office of Administration
References
83FR65367 00007, NRC-2018-0280
Download: ML19025A150 (1)


Text

PUBLIC SUBMISSION As of: 1/25/19 8:27 AM Received: January 22, 2019 Status: Pending_Post Tracking No. 1k3-97tv-g6va Comments Due: January 22, 2019 Submission Type: Web Docket: NRC-2018-0280 Virginia Electric and Power Company; Dominion Energy Virginia: Surry Power Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2 Comment On: NRC-2018-0280-0001 Virginia Electric and Power Company; Dominion Energy Virginia: Surry Power Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2 Document: NRC-2018-0280-DRAFT-0007 Comment on FR Doc # 2018-27547 Submitter Information Name: Scott Price Organization: Alliance for a Progressive Virginia General Comment The Alliance for a Progressive Virginia strongly opposes a further extension of the license of the Surry NPP.

It is clear that these reactors were never designed to remain in opporation for such long periods of time. The NRC is aware of the issues concerning aging facilities including reactor vessel embrittlement, irradiation assisted stress-1corrosion cracking of reactor internals and degradation of concrete structures, electrical cables and buried pipes. We are deeply concerned that the NRC is using a one size fits all approach to relicensing Surry NPP for an additional 20 years. We believe it is extremely premature to innitiate this process13 years before the first license extensions end in 2032 and 2033.

Furthermore, we note with alarm that documents exist that appear to show the NRC granted Dominions requests for relief and exemptions prior to Dominion submitting their application for subsequent license renewal. This seems to demonstrate a deeply problematic and potentially inappropriately close relationship between regulators and industry. With this in mind we are further concerned at the number and frequency of postponed inspections, tests and examinations that did not meet 100% coverage. At the least these tests need to be fully completed and all of the results made publicly available prior to any further review.

APV believes further steps must first be taken before any relicensing at Surry NPP proceeds. There is NO need to rush forward, instead the public needs a full accounting based on good science and free of industry bias.

Page 1 of 1 01/25/2019 https://www.fdms.gov/fdms/getcontent?objectId=0900006483a01116&format=xml&showorig=false SUNSI Review Complete Template = ADM-013 E-RIDS=ADM-03 ADD=Eric Oesterle, Tam Tran, Barbara Hayes COMMENT (7)

PUBLICATION DATE:

12/20/2018 CITATION 83 FR 65367