April 3rd, 2011 – Has the suspected Unit 1 primary containment leakage been factored into the assumptions and subsequent recommendations

From: [email protected]
Sent: Sunday: April 03, 2011 7:41 AM
To: Scott, Michael; [email protected]
Cc: Casto, Chuck; N [email protected]; [email protected] org
Subject: RE: Supplemental Information on Venting Rev 6

Mike,

Would you also provide an E-copy of the Supplemental Information on Venting (Rev 6)? Chuck passed us hardcopies
during our meeting earlier. Your Email below mentions 2 attachments, but I only received one,

I now have four documents

Supplemental Information on Venting (Rev 6) – as mentioned above 4-2-2011
– Supplemental lnfcrmation on Venting (Rev 6) – CONCURRENCE OFFICIALS 4-2-2011
– RST Assessment of Fukushima Daiichi Units (Rev 1) 3-31-2011
– 31 -March.cover Email from RST08 Hoc to RST01 Hoc 3-31-2011

I would be very grateful to be added to the distribution for any revisions as they are made available.

A few questions for clarification:
Has the suspected Unit 1 primary containment leakage discussed today (Chuck-to quantify) been factored into the assumptions and subsequent recommendations’)

Would you confirm the recommendations for Unit 1. in the 31-March Email mentioned above remain unchanged?

Thanks,
– Ed

Ed Bradley
Nuclear Engineer
Pages From C142759-02CX –21 Has the Suspected Unit 1 Primary Containment Leakage Discussed Today (Chuck-To…

Tags: Fukushima Daiichi, Japan, Reactor 1

April 3rd, 2011 – Has the suspected Unit 1 primary containment leakage been factored into the assumptions and subsequent recommendations

Share this:

Related