Talk:NUREG-1150

message: Today I again e-mailed and snail-mailed for more information on CRAC-II and NUREG-1150 from John German of Sandia National Laboratories. Simesa 00:17, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Note that in the above NONE of the figures is readable in the TEXT file (reached by clicking on the file name) - instead, click on the PDF symbol to the left of the file name. Simesa 03:13, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Today I received a note from Sandia National Labs that they are checking on the questions I posed and will respond. Simesa 18:07, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Today I received a phone call from SNL - they have found someone to answer the questions I posed, but that person will not be available for at least two weeks. Simesa 17:59, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

text: SNL has appointed a responder, but there will be a review process to his answers. Simesa 01:19, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Data requested 

message: I just received the following e-mail from the person who signed at the bottom (I will e-mail back to verify that NRC sent this):
Hello;
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission requests you include the following 
paragraph, attributed to the NRC, in your Wikipedia entries on CRAC-II 
and NUREG-1150:
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has devoted considerable 
research resources, both in the past and currently, to evaluating accidents 
and the possible public consequences of severe reactor accidents.  The 
NRC's most recent studies have confirmed that early research into the 
topic led to extremely conservative consequence analyses that generate 
invalid results  for attempting to quantify the possible effects of very 
unlikely severe accidents.  In particular, these previous studies did 
not reflect current plant design, operation, accident management 
strategies or security enhancements. They often used unnecessarily 
conservative estimates or assumptions concerning possible damage to the reactor 
core, the possible radioactive contamination that could be released, and 
possible failures of the reactor vessel and containment buildings. 
These previous studies also failed to realistically model the effect of 
emergency preparedness. The NRC staff is currently pursuing a new, 
state-of-the-art assessment of possible severe accidents and their 
consequences.
Please feel free to e-mail me to discuss this.
Scott Burnell ( srb3@nrc.gov ), 
Public Affairs Officer, 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Let's discuss this in this Discussion. Simesa 08:40, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: P.S. - When the report's authors disavow the results, that's of interest to an encyclopedia. Simesa 08:48, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In terms of style I think adding a short introduction explainning that it is an offical/semioffical whatever disclaimer by the authors of the reports might be better than simply putting it under a heading. But I agree that it is notable and shoudl be included.  I wonder if we can find a second source other than email. Dalf | Talk 09:08, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good points.  I have e-mailed and requested a web source for this. Simesa 09:36, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  NRC disclaimer to CRAC-II and NUREG-1150