ML11263A020: 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)
 
Line 16: Line 16:


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:King, Ikeda From: Imboden, Andy Sent: Friday, September 03, 2010 11:52 AM To: Folk, Kevin  
{{#Wiki_filter:King, Ikeda From:                         Imboden, Andy Sent:                         Friday, September 03, 2010 11:52 AM To:                           Folk, Kevin


==Subject:==
==Subject:==
RE: Salem/Hope Creek Follow-On Whatever's most efficient for you and for incorporating the changes into the document.
RE: Salem/Hope Creek Follow-On Whatever's most efficient for you and for incorporating the changes into the document. If you would rather do electronic, that's ok with me. Don't want to make more work for you than necessary.
If you would rather do electronic, that's ok with me. Don't want to make more work for you than necessary.
From: Folk, Kevin Sent: Friday, September 03, 2010 8:16 AM To: Imboden, Andy
From: Folk, Kevin Sent: Friday, September 03, 2010 8:16 AM To: Imboden, Andy  


==Subject:==
==Subject:==
RE: Salem/Hope Creek Follow-On Do you still prefer redline/strikeout or hardcopy markup?From: Imboden, Andy Sent: Thursday, September 02, 2010 1:28 PM To: Travers, Allison; Beissel, Dennis; Logan, Dennis; Rikhoff, Jeffrey; Moser, Michelle; Perkins, Leslie; Bulavinetz, Richard;Klementowicz, Stephen; Davis (FSME), Jennifer; Folk, Kevin; Balsam, Briana Cc: Susco, Jeremy; Cooper, Paula; Doyle, Daniel; Pham, Bo  
RE: Salem/Hope Creek Follow-On Do you still prefer redline/strikeout or hardcopy markup?
From: Imboden, Andy Sent: Thursday, September 02, 2010 1:28 PM To: Travers, Allison; Beissel, Dennis; Logan, Dennis; Rikhoff, Jeffrey; Moser, Michelle; Perkins, Leslie; Bulavinetz, Richard; Klementowicz, Stephen; Davis (FSME), Jennifer; Folk, Kevin; Balsam, Briana Cc: Susco, Jeremy; Cooper, Paula; Doyle, Daniel; Pham, Bo


==Subject:==
==Subject:==
Salem/Hope Creek Follow-On First off, I thank everyone for your attention and efforts on Salem/Hope Creek this week. I have a few follow-on messages o The overall directive is to "do the best you can with what you have" ... that's all I can ask. Towards that goal, I'd like the primary focus for the review staff to be taking a good, hard, skeptical look at areas where the contractor could be making a judgment call in favor of the applicant.
Salem/Hope Creek Follow-On First off, I thank everyone for your attention and efforts on Salem/Hope Creek this week. I have a few follow-on messages o   The overall directive is to "do the best you can with what you have" ... that's all I can ask. Towards that goal, I'd like the primary focus for the review staff to be taking a good, hard, skeptical look at areas where the contractor could be making a judgment call in favor of the applicant. Coming out of Tuesday, I feel that we didn't see egregiously malicious work ... but be vigilant in your reviews that the conclusions reached are based on sound logic and information.
Coming out of Tuesday, I feel that we didn't see egregiously malicious work ... but be vigilant in your reviews that the conclusions reached are based on sound logic and information.
    °   Please check the references to make sure that we are using the old (1996-1999) GELS, and NOT the new GELS.
° Please check the references to make sure that we are using the old (1996-1999)
o   Staff working on SEIS review should charge evenly to ME1833, ME1835, and ME1847 for Salem 1, Salem 2, and Hope Creek, respectively. Staff observing for training/qual purposes should charge to the appropriate training TAC (for environmental-specific quals MD3374; MD3230 for general quals), or as directed by your branch chief.
GELS, and NOT the new GELS.o Staff working on SEIS review should charge evenly to ME1833, ME1835, and ME1847 for Salem 1, Salem 2, and Hope Creek, respectively.
o   I believe everyone is working towards this anyways, but I'd like your sections by the end of the week.
Staff observing for training/qual purposes should charge to the appropriate training TAC (for environmental-specific quals MD3374; MD3230 for general quals), or as directed by your branch chief.o I believe everyone is working towards this anyways, but I'd like your sections by the end of the week.Thanks so much everybody, Andy I}}
Thanks so much everybody, Andy I}}

Latest revision as of 14:25, 12 November 2019

E-mail from A. Imboden, NRR, to K. Folk, NRR, on Salem/Hope Creek Follow-On
ML11263A020
Person / Time
Site: Salem, Hope Creek  PSEG icon.png
Issue date: 09/03/2010
From: Andy Imboden
Division of License Renewal
To: Kevin Folk
Division of License Renewal
References
FOIA/PA-2011-0113
Download: ML11263A020 (1)
v • d • e


Text

King, Ikeda From: Imboden, Andy Sent: Friday, September 03, 2010 11:52 AM To: Folk, Kevin

Subject:

RE: Salem/Hope Creek Follow-On Whatever's most efficient for you and for incorporating the changes into the document. If you would rather do electronic, that's ok with me. Don't want to make more work for you than necessary.

From: Folk, Kevin Sent: Friday, September 03, 2010 8:16 AM To: Imboden, Andy

Subject:

RE: Salem/Hope Creek Follow-On Do you still prefer redline/strikeout or hardcopy markup?

From: Imboden, Andy Sent: Thursday, September 02, 2010 1:28 PM To: Travers, Allison; Beissel, Dennis; Logan, Dennis; Rikhoff, Jeffrey; Moser, Michelle; Perkins, Leslie; Bulavinetz, Richard; Klementowicz, Stephen; Davis (FSME), Jennifer; Folk, Kevin; Balsam, Briana Cc: Susco, Jeremy; Cooper, Paula; Doyle, Daniel; Pham, Bo

Subject:

Salem/Hope Creek Follow-On First off, I thank everyone for your attention and efforts on Salem/Hope Creek this week. I have a few follow-on messages o The overall directive is to "do the best you can with what you have" ... that's all I can ask. Towards that goal, I'd like the primary focus for the review staff to be taking a good, hard, skeptical look at areas where the contractor could be making a judgment call in favor of the applicant. Coming out of Tuesday, I feel that we didn't see egregiously malicious work ... but be vigilant in your reviews that the conclusions reached are based on sound logic and information.

° Please check the references to make sure that we are using the old (1996-1999) GELS, and NOT the new GELS.

o Staff working on SEIS review should charge evenly to ME1833, ME1835, and ME1847 for Salem 1, Salem 2, and Hope Creek, respectively. Staff observing for training/qual purposes should charge to the appropriate training TAC (for environmental-specific quals MD3374; MD3230 for general quals), or as directed by your branch chief.

o I believe everyone is working towards this anyways, but I'd like your sections by the end of the week.

Thanks so much everybody, Andy I

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML11263A020&oldid=2112301"