ML19071A221: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
=Text= | =Text= | ||
{{#Wiki_filter:From: Jay Howland To: CHAIRMAN Resource | {{#Wiki_filter:From: Jay Howland To: CHAIRMAN Resource | ||
==Subject:== | ==Subject:== | ||
[External_Sender] Seabrook Station nuclear power plant Date: Sunday, March 10, 2019 11:22:13 AM | [External_Sender] Seabrook Station nuclear power plant Date: Sunday, March 10, 2019 11:22:13 AM | ||
==Dear Chairman Svinicki and NRC Commissioners:== | ==Dear Chairman Svinicki and NRC Commissioners:== | ||
As a homeowner downwind of the Seabrook Station nuclear power plant, I am writing to urge you to act on the Emergency Petition filed by C-10 on February | As a homeowner downwind of the Seabrook Station nuclear power plant, I am writing to urge you to act on the Emergency Petition filed by C-10 on February 13that is, to delay any further action on the requested license amendment or extension until the full resolution of the contentions brought by C-10 relative to the plants degraded concrete. | ||
C-10 has raised serious concerns about the ability of Seabrook's concrete to continue protecting the public, and about the inadequacy of the testing and analysis that underpin Seabrook's concrete aging management plans. C-10 is preparing for a hearing granted by NRCs Atomic Safety and Licensing Board. At the hearing they will provide the only independent peer review of the concrete testing methodology behind the plants license amendment request, which is based on a completely unprecedented approach to monitoring and managing alkali-silica reaction at a nuclear reactor. | |||
further action on the requested license amendment or extension until the full resolution of the | The seriousness of this matter demands more caution, more independent review, and more transparency than the issue has received so far. With 11 more years on Seabrooks current operating license, there is time for the NRC to do it right. Please permit the democratic process to proceed. While NRC representatives have stated that C-10 will get their hearing later this year, we urge you to wait on any rulings relative to the plant's license amendment request, or license extension, until C-10's contentions are heard and evaluated by the ASLB. | ||
contentions brought by C-10 relative to the | |||
C-10 has raised serious concerns about the ability of Seabrook's concrete to continue protecting the public, and about the inadequacy of the testing and analysis that underpin | |||
Seabrook's concrete aging management plans. C-10 is preparing for a hearing granted by | |||
At the hearing they will provide the only independent peer review of the concrete testing methodology behind the | |||
amendment request, which is based on a completely unprecedented approach to monitoring | |||
and managing alkali-silica reaction at a nuclear reactor. | |||
The seriousness of this matter demands more caution, more independent review, and more transparency than the issue has received so far. With 11 more years on | |||
On behalf of my family and of all of us, thank you. | On behalf of my family and of all of us, thank you. | ||
Sincerely, Jessie W. Howland}} | Sincerely, Jessie W. Howland}} | ||
Latest revision as of 23:12, 19 October 2019
| ML19071A221 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook  |
| Issue date: | 03/10/2019 |
| From: | Howland J - No Known Affiliation |
| To: | NRC/SECY |
| SECY/RAS | |
| References | |
| Download: ML19071A221 (1) | |
Text
From: Jay Howland To: CHAIRMAN Resource
Subject:
[External_Sender] Seabrook Station nuclear power plant Date: Sunday, March 10, 2019 11:22:13 AM
Dear Chairman Svinicki and NRC Commissioners:
As a homeowner downwind of the Seabrook Station nuclear power plant, I am writing to urge you to act on the Emergency Petition filed by C-10 on February 13that is, to delay any further action on the requested license amendment or extension until the full resolution of the contentions brought by C-10 relative to the plants degraded concrete.
C-10 has raised serious concerns about the ability of Seabrook's concrete to continue protecting the public, and about the inadequacy of the testing and analysis that underpin Seabrook's concrete aging management plans. C-10 is preparing for a hearing granted by NRCs Atomic Safety and Licensing Board. At the hearing they will provide the only independent peer review of the concrete testing methodology behind the plants license amendment request, which is based on a completely unprecedented approach to monitoring and managing alkali-silica reaction at a nuclear reactor.
The seriousness of this matter demands more caution, more independent review, and more transparency than the issue has received so far. With 11 more years on Seabrooks current operating license, there is time for the NRC to do it right. Please permit the democratic process to proceed. While NRC representatives have stated that C-10 will get their hearing later this year, we urge you to wait on any rulings relative to the plant's license amendment request, or license extension, until C-10's contentions are heard and evaluated by the ASLB.
On behalf of my family and of all of us, thank you.
Sincerely, Jessie W. Howland