(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
|
|---|
Category:General FR Notice Comment Letter
MONTHYEARML19087A2182019-03-0707 March 2019
Comment (7) of John Gauley on PSDAR License Transfer Application -Entergy to Holtec at Pilgrim Nuclear Power Plant
ML19065A1932019-03-0404 March 2019
Comment (10) of J. B. Lampert on Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station; Consideration of Approval of Transfer of License and Conforming Amendment
ML19065A1962019-03-0404 March 2019
Comment (11) of Guy Page on Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station; Consideration of Approval of Transfer of License and Conforming Amendment
ML19065A1982019-03-0404 March 2019
Comment (12) of Brad Ferland on Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station; Consideration of Approval of Transfer of License and Conforming Amendment
ML19065A1882019-03-0303 March 2019
Comment (8) of Mary Gatslick on Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station; Consideration of Approval of Transfer of License and Conforming Amendment
ML19065A1922019-03-0303 March 2019
Comment (9) of James B. Lampert on Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station; Consideration of Approval of Transfer of License and Conforming Amendment
ML19065A1802019-03-0101 March 2019
Comment (6) of David Noyes Supporting Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station; Consideration of Approval of Transfer of License and Conforming Amendment
ML19065A1872019-03-0101 March 2019
Comment (7) of Henrietta Cosentino on Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station; Consideration of Approval of Transfer of License and Conforming Amendment
ML19059A0232019-02-27027 February 2019
Comment (5) of Rebecca Chin on Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station; Consideration of Approval of Transfer of License and Conforming Amendment
ML19057A1882019-02-24024 February 2019
Comment (3) of Anonymous Individual on Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station; Consideration of Approval of Transfer of License and Conforming Amendment
ML19057A1902019-02-24024 February 2019
Comment (4) from Anonymous Regarding Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station; Consideration of Approval of Transfer of License and Conforming Amendment
ML19046A0172019-02-13013 February 2019
Comment (2) from Anonymous on Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station; Consideration of Approval of Transfer of License and Conforming Amendment
ML19057A1852019-02-13013 February 2019
Comment (1) from Anonymous on Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.; Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station
ML19032A0732019-01-31031 January 2019
Comment (1) from Anonymous on Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station; Consideration of Approval of Transfer of License and Conforming Amendment
ML18191B1332018-07-0606 July 2018
Comment (83) of Anonymous on Draft Letter to the Nuclear Energy Institute Regarding the Clarification of Regulatory Paths for Lead Test Assemblies
ML18187A2052018-07-0505 July 2018
Comment (21) of Mary Lampert & Rebecca Chin on Draft Letter to Nuclear Energy Institute Regarding Clarification of Regulatory Paths for Lead Test Assemblies
ML18187A3432018-07-0505 July 2018
Comment (46) of James Garb on Draft Letter to the Nuclear Energy Institute Regarding the Clarification of Regulatory Paths for Lead Test Assemblies
ML14304A5432014-10-25025 October 2014
Comment (00004) of Heather Lightner on Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.; Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station; Extension of Public Comment Period
ML14281A2572014-09-25025 September 2014
Comment (00002) of David Lochbaum on Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.; Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station
ML14107A0222014-04-0808 April 2014
Comment (15) of Janet Azarovitz on Emergency Planning Exemption Requests for Decommissioning Nuclear Power Plants
ML13007A4062013-01-0202 January 2013
Comment (136) of Thomas J. Calter, State Representative on Environmental Impacts of Temporary Storage of Spent Fuel After Cessation of Reactor Operation
ML1001302102010-01-12012 January 2010
Comment (05) of Mary Lampert on Behalf of Pilgrim Watch on Revisions to Environmental Review for Renewal of Nuclear Power Plant Operating License
ML0804203042008-01-21021 January 2008
Comment (1) of Tom Gurdziel Opposing the Inclusion of Vermont Yankee, Indian Point Unit 1, Indian Point Unit 2, and Indian Point Unit 3 in a Holding Company Owned by Entergy
ML0729604572007-10-12012 October 2007
Comment (28) of Susan Shapiro on Behalf of Friends United for Sustainable Energy USA, Inc., Supporting Environmental Impact Statement and Scoping Process of Indian Point, Units 2 and 3
ML0706601332007-02-28028 February 2007
Comments (9) of Diane Curran and Matthew Brock on Behalf of Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley Opposing Draft Supplemental 29 to Generic EIS for License Renewal of Pilgrim Nuclear Power Plant
ML0706603262007-02-28028 February 2007
Comment (15) of Robert S. Knorr on the Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement on the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station Located in Plymouth Massachusetts (NUREG-1437, Supplement 29)
ML0706601352007-02-28028 February 2007
Comment (10) of Robert W. Varney on Behalf of United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 1 Regarding Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Power Plants Supplement 29 Regarding Pilgrim Nuclear Power
ML0706602732007-02-28028 February 2007
Comment (11) of Pine Dubois on Behalf of Jones River Watershed Association on Nrc'S NUREG-1437, Supplement 29 Draft Report Regarding Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station
ML0706602932007-02-28028 February 2007
Comment (14) of Diana L. Woebcke Opposing Application Renewal for Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station
ML0706602402007-02-28028 February 2007
Comment (13) of Brian Thurber, Frank Gorke and Alyssa Schuren Opposing the NUREG-1437, Supplement 29 Draft
ML0706602852007-02-28028 February 2007
Comment (12) of Paul E. Mccormack Opposed to Permanent Storage of Nuclear Waste at Pilgrim Nuclear Power Plant
ML0706601222007-02-27027 February 2007
Comment (8) of Millie Morrison Opposing Relicensing of Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station
ML0706600592007-02-27027 February 2007
Comment (17) of Mary Osborn Opposing Relicensing of Pilgrim Nuclear Power Plant (NUREG-1437, Suppl. 29)
ML0706600792007-02-27027 February 2007
Comment (16) of Stephen J. Bethay, on Behalf of Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., on NUREG-1437, Supplement 29, Regarding Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station
ML0706601172007-02-25025 February 2007
Comment (7) of Lilias Cingolani Opposing Re-Licensing of Pilgrim Nuclear Plant in 2008
ML0706601142007-02-23023 February 2007
Comment (6) of Rebecca Chin Opposing Re-Licensing of Pilgrim Nuclear Plant in 2008
ML0706601072007-02-18018 February 2007
Comment (5) of Heidi Mayo Opposing Draft Supplemental Environmental Review of NUREG-1437, Supplement 29
ML0704704062007-02-14014 February 2007
Comment (4) of Mary Lampert on Behalf of Pilgrim Watch Regarding Draft NUREG-1437, Supplement 29
ML0704302632007-02-0505 February 2007
Comment (3) of Mary Lampert on Draft Supplemental Environmental Review - Draft NUREG-1437, Supplement 29 -Summary
ML0704302602007-01-28028 January 2007
Comment (2) of Rebecca Hall Opposing the Re-Licensing of Pilgrim Nuclear Plant in 2008
ML0704302542007-01-18018 January 2007
Comment (1) of Joan Bartlett Re Pilgrim Power Plan in Plymouth, Requesting Part of the Negotiations Between Entergy and Town of Plymouth Include Preservation of Entergy Land So That for Safety Reasons, No More Development Will Take Place Ne
ML0630703232006-06-26026 June 2006
E-MaiI: Fwd: Comment (1) of Alex Marion on Behalf of Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) on Proposed ISG LR-ISG-2006-01
ML0617703952006-06-20020 June 2006
2006/06/20-Comment (5) of Frank Gorke and Stephanie Abrahams on Scope of Environmental Review for the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station License Renewal Application - Federal Register Notice, April 14, 2006
ML0617700452006-06-16016 June 2006
Comment (7) of Elizabeth A. Higgins, Re Scoping Comments in Response to Notice of Intent to Prepare Environmental Impact Statement for Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station in Plymouth, Massachusetts
ML0617700432006-06-16016 June 2006
Comment (4) of Sheila S. Hollis, Re Pilgrim Power Station Regarding Renewal of Facility Operating License DPR-35 for a 20 Year Period
ML0617702772006-06-15015 June 2006
2006/06/15-Comment (3) of Diane Curran, and Matthew Brock, Re EIS Scoping Process for Pilgrim Nuclear Plant License Renewal, Proceeding, 71 Fed. Reg. 19,554 (April 14, 2006)
ML0617704072006-06-15015 June 2006
2006/06/15-Comment (6) of R. J. Chin, H Chang, M. Lampert, M. Morrison, & B. Pye on Scope of Environmental Review for the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station'S License Renewal Application-Federal Register Notice, April 14, 2006
ML0617101042006-06-14014 June 2006
2006/06/14-Comment (2) of Mary Lampert on Behalf of Pilgrim Watch Regarding Scope of the Environmental Review for Pilgrim License Renewal Application - Direct Torus Vent System
ML0616701012006-06-12012 June 2006
2006/06/12-Comment (1) of Mary Lampert, Re Scope of the Environmental Review for Pilgrim'S License Renewal Application
ML0511202392005-04-15015 April 2005
Comment (3) of Mary Lampert, Deborah Katz, Rochelle Becker, Brendan Hoffman, David Agnew, Jed Thorp and Jim Warren on Federal Register Notice Dated 02/28/2005 Re Station Blackout Risk Evaluation for Nuclear Power Plants (Draft), January 200
2019-03-07
[Table view] |
Text
I Doris Mendiola - Response from "Contact Us About Operator Licensing' Pagel1It Doi Medil .. Repo. fro ,Cnc U. A.u .prao Liesig Pag 1, ,,
From:
To:
Date:
Subject:
Scott Willoughby <dwillouXentergy.com>
<operlic @nrc.gov>
10/8/03 1:40PM Response from "Contact Us About Operator Licensing" 00 Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by ZZ 1 I Z
-1 Scott Willoughby (dwillou entergy.com) on Wednesday, October 08, 2003 at 13:40:09 13-7 recipient location: Washington, DC (Hdqtrs.) 0-comments: Appendix E of Draft Revision 9 of NUREG-1021 prohibits discussing any portion ofcbe ~ P`r~
Operating Exam (which includes JPMs) with anyone who was not on the same simulator crew¶5ior t64*e exit meeting. The reason given in the standard is that this prohibition helps preserve test integrity anP fairness. By prohibiting persons from discussing completed JPMs, situations are arising where candidates are placed in a room together (under the control of an instructor) and each of the candidates in the room have completed the same JPMs. This restriction prevents the candidates from discussing the one thing they want to discuss, i.e., "How did you do on that JPM." If everyone in the room has already seen the JPM, there does not seem to be any issues related to integrity, fairness, exam security, etc. Additionally, taking an instructor to prevent these candidates from discussing the JPMs takes up resources when it seems there are no issues with exam security at all. Addi!
tionally, we have to monitor individuals while at the training center to ensure they do not discuss JPMs but when they leave for the day they are not on an exam security agreement but are on the honor system to not discuss JPMs. And lastly, the fact that the candidates are in the same room with individuals who have seen the JPMs but preventing them from talking about the JPMs adds undue stress to the candidates.
organization: Entergy-Pilgrim Station addressl: 46 Sandwich Road address2:
city: Plymouth state: MA zip: 02360 country: USA phone: (508) 830-7638
> c- 4t
/ 7-~ "--~1