ML17309A010: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
 
(2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 2: Line 2:
| number = ML17309A010
| number = ML17309A010
| issue date = 03/01/2017
| issue date = 03/01/2017
| title = 2017/03/01 Seabrook La - (External_Sender) the NRC Acceptance of the Sla
| title = La - (External_Sender) the NRC Acceptance of the Sla
| author name =  
| author name =  
| author affiliation = - No Known Affiliation
| author affiliation = - No Known Affiliation
Line 16: Line 16:


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:1 SeabrookLANPEm Resource From:Deborah Grinnell <grinnelldebbie2@gmail.com>
{{#Wiki_filter:SeabrookLANPEm Resource From:                             Deborah Grinnell <grinnelldebbie2@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 01, 2017 10:14 AM To: Buford, Angela
Sent:                             Wednesday, March 01, 2017 10:14 AM To:                               Buford, Angela


==Subject:==
==Subject:==
[External_Sender] The NRC acceptance of the SLA Angela, NextEra has not answered the questions you asked. in research The NRC still can not state Seabrook is operating with ASR under their license and never will be able to operate safely under their UFSAR and current license. NextEra's SLA has not addressed how they will monitor ASR in the complexity required ( which is a guess) nor have they been reliable in monitoring ASR at Seabrook in all the NRC documentation. Since 2011 without the NRC inspector's violations or NRC RAI's to push them to learn and you learn and understand the requirements to monitor or even monitor under NRC pressure to corrective actions or violations or rewriting their responses to the NRC RAI. Will they?? NO. The NRC studies are not complete or peer reviewed, right??
[External_Sender] The NRC acceptance of the SLA
BUT you know you needed the NIST study done a nd peer reviewed in a gold standard.
: Angela, NextEra has not answered the questions you asked. in research The NRC still can not state Seabrook is operating with ASR under their license and never will be able to operate safely under their UFSAR and current license. NextEras SLA has not addressed how they will monitor ASR in the complexity required ( which is a guess) nor have they been reliable in monitoring ASR at Seabrook in all the NRC documentation. Since 2011 without the NRC inspectors violations or NRC RAIs to push them to learn and you learn and understand the requirements to monitor or even monitor under NRC pressure to corrective actions or violations or rewriting their responses to the NRC RAI. Will they?? NO. The NRC studies are not complete or peer reviewed, right??
BUT you know you needed the NIST study done and peer reviewed in a gold standard.
I can not believe the NRC accepted NextEra license amendment. Did you accept the SLA ?? Did the NRC research division accept the SLA?? Did anyone? How?
Is the decision based on on basis.you dont have an ASR basis to accept it. The operative determination is singularly based on a single day..ASR at Seabrook will collapseand to continue to operate the plant you will only continue to report SEABROOKs ASR until the one report about a collapse. Hopefully it will not be at a ground level radiation release and the public radiation health exposure lot of people are at riskisnt that your job to protect usor is it to primarily to release the plant?? I has been proven, hasnt it?? Lawyers can not morally cover your responsibly, can they?
Debbie 1


I can not believe the NRC accepted NextEr'a license amendment. Did you accept the SLA ?? Did the NRC research division accept the SLA?? Did anyone? How?
Hearing Identifier:   Seabrook_LA_NonPublic Email Number:         367 Mail Envelope Properties   (6B2B4F8A-0606-4214-8A35-2EC0E5476336)
 
Is the decision based on on basis-.you don't have an ASR basis to accept it. The operative determination is singularly based on a single day-..ASR at Seabrook will collapse-and to continue to operate the plant you will only continue to report SEABROOK' s ASR until the one report about a coll apse. Hopefully it will not be at a ground level radiation release and th e public radiation health exposure
 
lot of people are at risk-isn't that your job to protect us-or is it to primarily to release the plant?? I has been proven, hasn't it?? Lawyers can not mora lly cover your responsibly, can they?
 
Debbie Hearing Identifier: Seabrook_LA_NonPublic Email Number: 367   Mail Envelope Properties   (6B2B4F8A-0606-4214-8A35-2EC0E5476336)


==Subject:==
==Subject:==
  [External_Sender] The NRC acceptance of the SLA Sent Date:   3/1/2017 10:14:14 AM Received Date: 3/1/2017 10:14:18 AM From:   Deborah Grinnell Created By:   grinnelldebbie2@gmail.com Recipients:     "Buford, Angela" <Angela.Buford@nrc.gov>
[External_Sender] The NRC acceptance of the SLA Sent Date:             3/1/2017 10:14:14 AM Received Date:         3/1/2017 10:14:18 AM From:                 Deborah Grinnell Created By:           grinnelldebbie2@gmail.com Recipients:
Tracking Status: None  
"Buford, Angela" <Angela.Buford@nrc.gov>
 
Tracking Status: None Post Office:           gmail.com Files                           Size                 Date & Time MESSAGE                         1608                 3/1/2017 10:14:18 AM Options Priority:                       Standard Return Notification:           No Reply Requested:               No Sensitivity:                   Normal Expiration Date:
Post Office:   gmail.com Files     Size     Date & Time MESSAGE   1608     3/1/2017 10:14:18 AM
Recipients Received:}}
 
Options Priority:     Standard   Return Notification:   No   Reply Requested:   No   Sensitivity:     Normal Expiration Date:     Recipients Received:}}

Latest revision as of 20:13, 2 December 2019

La - (External_Sender) the NRC Acceptance of the Sla
ML17309A010
Person / Time
Site: Seabrook NextEra Energy icon.png
Issue date: 03/01/2017
From:
- No Known Affiliation
To:
Division of Operating Reactor Licensing
References
17-953-02-LA-BD01
Download: ML17309A010 (2)


Text

SeabrookLANPEm Resource From: Deborah Grinnell <grinnelldebbie2@gmail.com>

Sent: Wednesday, March 01, 2017 10:14 AM To: Buford, Angela

Subject:

[External_Sender] The NRC acceptance of the SLA

Angela, NextEra has not answered the questions you asked. in research The NRC still can not state Seabrook is operating with ASR under their license and never will be able to operate safely under their UFSAR and current license. NextEras SLA has not addressed how they will monitor ASR in the complexity required ( which is a guess) nor have they been reliable in monitoring ASR at Seabrook in all the NRC documentation. Since 2011 without the NRC inspectors violations or NRC RAIs to push them to learn and you learn and understand the requirements to monitor or even monitor under NRC pressure to corrective actions or violations or rewriting their responses to the NRC RAI. Will they?? NO. The NRC studies are not complete or peer reviewed, right??

BUT you know you needed the NIST study done and peer reviewed in a gold standard.

I can not believe the NRC accepted NextEra license amendment. Did you accept the SLA ?? Did the NRC research division accept the SLA?? Did anyone? How?

Is the decision based on on basis.you dont have an ASR basis to accept it. The operative determination is singularly based on a single day..ASR at Seabrook will collapseand to continue to operate the plant you will only continue to report SEABROOKs ASR until the one report about a collapse. Hopefully it will not be at a ground level radiation release and the public radiation health exposure lot of people are at riskisnt that your job to protect usor is it to primarily to release the plant?? I has been proven, hasnt it?? Lawyers can not morally cover your responsibly, can they?

Debbie 1

Hearing Identifier: Seabrook_LA_NonPublic Email Number: 367 Mail Envelope Properties (6B2B4F8A-0606-4214-8A35-2EC0E5476336)

Subject:

[External_Sender] The NRC acceptance of the SLA Sent Date: 3/1/2017 10:14:14 AM Received Date: 3/1/2017 10:14:18 AM From: Deborah Grinnell Created By: grinnelldebbie2@gmail.com Recipients:

"Buford, Angela" <Angela.Buford@nrc.gov>

Tracking Status: None Post Office: gmail.com Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 1608 3/1/2017 10:14:18 AM Options Priority: Standard Return Notification: No Reply Requested: No Sensitivity: Normal Expiration Date:

Recipients Received: