Talk:Nuclear safety in the United States
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Energy, which collaborates on articles related to energy. | |
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the assessment scale. | |
| Low | This article is on a subject of low importance within energy. | |
|
This article has been rated but has no comments. If appropriate, please review the article and leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need. |
||
Contents |
[edit] Initial stub
Yes, I know I just scratched the surface of nuclear safety. I do expect a mighty oak to grow from this acorn. Simesa 11:35, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
- It seems like right now there is a lot of information that's simply repeated from other pages. There's a lot that can go here, for instance, if you're talking about the FSAR, then there's an entire alphabet that should follow with COL, RSAC, NUPOP, and all that kind of thing. Those are specific procedure items present in the U.S. So I see the logic of having a place such as this for those, but please take a look at the Nuclear power in the United States article (which is already fairly neglected) and let's think about how to get the entire bunch of them to make sense. Happy editing! theanphibian 17:30, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Rocket-sled test film
Sandia has something wrong on the page with their rocket sled test. I wrote to them about it. Simesa 12:03, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] An example Reg Guide
Regulatory Guide 1.9. Simesa 13:35, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Dispute - Three Mile Island
According to Three Mile Island accident, this section is wrong. "From a safety viewpoint, the system functioned as designed.", well, I guess technically, it functioned as designed but the design was shown to be flawed. I'll leave it in but add the design was flawed. That way it can stay but we fix the POV to be correct. Fanra 09:38, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
