| |
 |
|
|
Science Forum Index » Energy Forum » Action alert = ask NRC to delay weakening fire rules]
Page 1 of 1
|
| Author |
Message |
| Daniel J. Lavigne |
 Posted: Sun Nov 30, 2003 11:57 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Norm Cohen <ncohen12@comcast.net> wrote:
(A short letter to NRC that you can cut-and-patse and send to NRC is
posted at the bottom of this email)
Please take a minute and send the NRC the letter.
norm
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: NRC Attempts to Abandon N-Power Fire Code
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 18:59:54 -0500
From: Paul Gunter <pgunter@nirs.org>
To: pgunter@igc.org
Hello,
Please read the attached copies of today's Federal Register notice
regarding "Interim Draft Criteria for Determining Feasibility of Manual
Actions to Achieve Post-Fire Safe Shutdown" and the NIRS letter to NRC
requesting an extension of the public comment period.
Your request for an extension of the public comment period is urgently
needed to help head off the NRC effort to curtail and expedite a public
comment period and abandon the agency's enforcement of prescriptive fire
protection codes at U.S. nuclear power stations in lieu widespread
n-industry non-compliance by use of unapproved, unreviewed and
unvalidated "operator manual actions." These unapproved manual actions
have been substituted for long standing n-industry commitments to
upgrade inoperable fire barriers and failure to maintain 20-feet of
seperation between redundant electrical cables which control and power
the reactor's safe shutdown equipment in the event of fire.
Since many operators can not take credit for inoperable fire barriers
and lack of separation issues as required to protect electrical cabling
used to automatically/remotely shutdown the reactor from the control
room, fire safety at many U.S. nuclear power stations now relies upon
operators to run down a corridor, possibly through flames, smoke and
radiation to throw switches, pull the circuit breakers or manually turn
valves needed to shut the reactor down. NRC is now seeking to approve
these manual actions rather than require the operators to upgrade
passive fire barrier systems.
A NIRS fact sheet is soon coming that will further explain the growing
risks associated with the lack of adequate fire protection and the NRC's
current retreat from its regulatory responsibility to enforce fire codes
at nuclear power stations. The fact sheet will assist in providing you
with information needed to comment on this NRC effort to grant
"enforcement discretion" to fire code violators and an impending
expedited rulemaking to rewrite the industry fire code to make current
violations "compliant."
The attached NIRS letter to NRC requests a 30-day extension to an
announced 30-day public comment period for draft criteria published in
today's Federal Register that would codify currently non-compliant
actions and forgive long standing and widespread fire protection
violations at nuclear power stations.
Dont wait---Request an extension of the public comment period to the
attached Federal Register notice.
Email your request to NRC at < nrcrep@nrc.gov >, today.
Tell NRC you want the extension to submit "meaningful comments" on fire
protection regulations at nuclear power stations as a matter that
effects our communities health and safety.
PLEASE SEND A COPY OF YOUR EXTENSION REQUEST TO NIRS.
Thanks,
Paul Gunter, Director
Reactor Watchdog Project
Nuclear Information and Resource Service
1424 16th Street NW Suite 404
Washington, DC 20036
Tel. 202 328 0002
www.nirs.org
Email your request to NRC at mailto:nrcrep@nrc.gov
LETTER TO NRC:
Dear NRC
This letter requests a 30-day extension to the announced 30-day public
comment
period for draft criteria published in the Federal Register that
would codify currently non-compliant actions and forgive long
standing and widespread fire protection
violations at nuclear power stations.
Sincerely,
Name
Address
***********************************************
It is extremely important that no changes take place
with respect to the required enforcement of fire
safety rules in Nuclear power plants.
The desire to change / abrogate the existing rules
is part of an attempt to reduce the standards in
place with respect to constructing / modifying /
repairing Nuclear power plants in order to save
costs, show enhanced profatibility to investors,
and to accelerate the planned development of
more nuclear power plants.
The scheme to review and replace the existing
requirements is based on the understanding of
governments that the fast approaching energy
crisis will lead to a societal catastrophe,
based on economic collapse and the resultant
spread of worldwide anarchy.
While concerns about such matters are valid, we must not risk
the possibility / probability that reduced safety standards
will lead to more melt-downs of Nuclear cores and the
resulting spread of radio-activity worldwide.
If you are a "taxpayer" who has failed to act on your duty to
refuse to support a society that would be party to mass murder:
Start thinking of your interests with respect to the viability
of your soil, should a nuclear reactor upwind from you suffer
a meltdown. Think about having a say in matters that might
endanger your life, prior to the government deciding, unilaterally,
to risk your life and your familys future, in order that it might
have a better chance of slowing / stopping the spread of anarchy
in the days following the development of a worldwide awareness
that we are on a one way trip to an energy depleted future.
Thank you.
Daniel J. Lavigne
***********************************************
Say "Enough!" to societal insanity.
Help bring about the changes that must take place.
Join the Tax Refusal.
Act on your now recognized right and duty to refuse to
support a society that would be party to Mass Murder.
***********************************************
http://www.taxrefusal.com http://www.dieoff.com |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| G. R. L. Cowan |
| Posted: Sun Nov 30, 2003 12:57 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Daniel J. Lavigne" wrote:
Quote:
Norm Cohen <ncohen12@comcast.net> wrote:
(A short letter to NRC that you can cut-and-patse ...
Patsie, eh? That's ancient slang whose meaning
I'm not sure of, but I think it might be appropriate,
as in, don't be one.
Quote: Start thinking of your interests with respect to the viability
of your soil, should a nuclear reactor upwind from you suffer
a meltdown.
Accidental fuel melting is in the nature of the fission beast,
unless it's a carbon reactor like the German THTR,
the planned pebble-bed, and some others
(including, ironically, the uniquely explodible RBMK design).
It was much thought about and planned for before I was born,
and projections from about that time were that with such preparation,
fuel melting might wreck some reactors,
but it would very reliably be prevented from doing any off-site harm.
And indeed that has been the experience,
cf. http://www.nuclearfaq.ca/cnf_sectionD.htm#x
Compare http://tinyurl.com/x3l2 .
Quote: Think about having a say in matters that might
endanger your life, prior to the government deciding, unilaterally,
to risk your life and your familys future,
The purpose of urgings such as the above is to *increase*
public risk by slowing down nuclear substitution --
http://www.iea.org/statist/keyworld2002/key2002/p_0203.htm --
of fossil fuels. Fossil fuels bring in more tax.
--- Graham Cowan
http://www.eagle.ca/~gcowan/Paper_for_11th_CHC.doc --
fireproof fuel, real-car range, nuclear cachet |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
|
Page 1 of 1
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Fri Jan 09, 2009 2:36 am
|
|